JENNIFER MORTEJO (2:59:46 3:30)

Two basic issues that will be determined under Rule 69:

1. The existence of the co-ownership over the property subject thereof; and
2. How the property will be divided
These two principal issues will now be subject of two stages of the proceedings:
First is the determination of the co-ownership; and
Second is the actual partition of the property once co-ownership has been determined. And in that regard, for the second stage, you
will need the appointment of commissioners. In actual partition, the metes and bounds must be stated and the property adequately
described, particularly the portion of the estate assigned to each party. It must be stated in the judgment itself.
Now if the property has been sold, because actual partition is not feasible, then the name of the purchaser and the definite description
of the parcels of real estate sold to the each purchaser must be included in the judgment.
In a partition action, the rents and profits over the property will be accounted for. And the share of each party shall be included in the
judgment. Costs and expenses will be equitably taxed and apportioned among the parties, including the compensation of the
commissioners as well as the costs of registration.
Registration follows after the judgment has become final and executory. Take note, personal property can also be subject of partition
under Rule 69.
RULE 70
FORCIBLE ENTRY AND UNLAWFUL DETAINER
We already know what kind of an action it is, its possessory, particularly accion interdictal. Unlawful detainer is also known as
(retertacion?) and forcible entry is desahucio. It is also in the nature of a (time?) proceeding. That is why these actions are governed by
the summary proceedings. Among the special civil actions, this is the one governed by the summary rules of procedure. The
importance here is to expedite the resolution of these cases in order to address the disturbance of the social order and the restoration
of the social order. The reason why it is governed by the summary rules of procedure is to avoid technicalities and details of procedure.
Purpose of the action
For restitution of possession, damages and costs.
When do you file the action?
Forcible entry - it is one year from the dispossession by force, intimidation, strategy, threat or stealth.
Unlawful detainer - it is also one year from demand or from the time the possession becomes unlawful.
Take note that in forcible entry, possession is unlawful from the beginning while in unlawful detainer, the possession is initially lawful. In
forcible entry, prior physical possession must be alleged and proven by the plaintiff whereas under unlawful detainer, prior demand to
vacate is jurisdictional.
Banes vs Lutheran Church of the Philippines
G.R. No. 142308 (November 15, 2005)
The Supreme Court said that the owner who has title to the property cannot take the law into his own hands to regain possession of the
said property. He must go the court. That is in keeping with Article 536 of the Civil Code which says:
Art. 536. In no case may possession be acquired through force or intimidation as long as there is a possessor who objects thereto. He
who believes that he has an action or a right to deprive another of the holding of a thing, must invoke the aid of the competent court, if
the holder should refuse to deliver the thing.
From the FT: There is forcible entry or desahucio when one is deprived of physical possession of land or building by means of force,
intimidation, threat, strategy or stealth. In such cases, the possession is illegal from the beginning and the basic inquiry centers on who
has the prior possession de facto. In filing forcible entry cases, the law tells us that two allegations are mandatory for the
municipal court to acquire jurisdiction: first, the plaintiff must allege prior physical possession of the property, and second,
he must also allege that he was deprived of his possession by any of the means provided for in Section 1, Rule 70 of the
Rules of Court i.e., by force, intimidation, threat, strategy or stealth. It is also settled that in the resolution thereof, what is
important is determining who is entitled to the physical possession of the property. Indeed, any of the parties who can prove prior
possession de facto may recover such possession even from the owner himself since such cases proceed independently of any claim
of ownership and the plaintiff needs merely to prove prior possession de facto and undue deprivation thereof.
In order to constitute force that would justify a forcible entry case, the trespasser does not have to institute a state of war. The
act of going to the property and excluding the lawful possessor therefrom necessarily implies the exertion of force over the property
which is all that is necessary and sufficient to show that the action is based on the provisions of Section 1, Rule 70 of the Rules of
Court.

It is true that petitioners Baes and Del Rosario wrote LCP expressing their willingness to voluntarily vacate the premises upon finding
another place to live in, but this is after respondents had padlocked the premises and used armed men to prevent their coming to and
from the premises. Otherwise stated, said letters do not negate the initial use of force by respondents which constituted forcible entry. It
is undisputed that respondents owned the property occupied by petitioners, still their use of force in evicting petitioners therefrom was
not justified. Indeed, regardless of the actual condition of the title to the property, the party in peaceable quiet possession shall not be
thrown out by a strong hand, violence or terror. The owner who has title over the property cannot take the law into his own hands to
regain possession of said property. He must go to court.
The parties to the forcible entry: Plaintiff and Defendant.
In an unlawful detainer case, the plaintiff may either be a lessor, vendor, vendee and the defendant is any person who has possession
and is unlawfully withholding such possession from the rightful possessor.
Take note that in a contract to sell, the vendor can file an action for ejectment against the buyer who has been in the possession of the
property after the execution of the contract to sell. But you must first comply with two requisites:
1. Failure to pay the installment due, or to comply with the conditions of the contract to sell; and
2. You have the sent a demand to pay or to comply and vacate the premises.
As to the vendee/buyer, he can also file an action for unlawful detainer against the one in possession and the basis for that is under
Article 1477 and 1498 of the Civil Code.
Art. 1477. The ownership of the thing sold shall be transferred to the vendee upon the actual or constructive delivery thereof.
Art. 1498. When the sale is made through a public instrument, the execution thereof shall be equivalent to the delivery of the thing
which is the object of the contract, if from the deed the contrary does not appear or cannot clearly be inferred.
The defendant contemplated under Article 1477 and 1498 is the vendor himself. If he has sold the property to the vendee and he
refuses to vacate after the sale, the vendee can file an unlawful detainer case against him. Now, what if the one in possession is not the
vendor himself but his lessee? Then the basis would be Article 1676 of the Civil Code for the vendee to file an unlawful detainer case
against the existing lessee.
Art. 1676. The purchaser of a piece of land which is under a lease that is not recorded in the Registry of Property may terminate the
lease, save when there is a stipulation to the contrary in the contract of sale, or when the purchaser knows of the existence of the
lease.
If the buyer makes use of this right, the lessee may demand that he be allowed to gather the fruits of the harvest which corresponds to
the current agricultural year and that the vendor indemnify him for damages suffered.
If the sale is fictitious, for the purpose of extinguishing the lease, the supposed vendee cannot make use of the right granted in the first
paragraph of this article. The sale is presumed to be fictitious if at the time the supposed vendee demands the termination of the lease,
the sale is not recorded in the Registry of Property. (1571a)
Like we said, the period of filing is 1 year from the withholding of possession. For forcible entry, the 1 year is counted from the date of
entry or taking of possession. But if it is based on stealth, then the 1 year period is counted from the time the plaintiff learned thereof,
so when it was discovered.
Is the 1 year period interrupted by barangay conciliation for unlawful detainer case? YES.
Who has exclusive original jurisdiction?
You have the MTC, MeTC, MCTC and the MTCC. And the exceptions would be those cases under DARAB and HLURB.
Take note that the jurisdiction of the lower courts is not affected by the value of the property. It could be at millions of pesos but still
jurisdiction is with the MTC. Neither is it affected by the amount of damages that is being claimed in the complaint. It could be millions
also but still the jurisdiction belongs with the MTC.
Remember that under Rule 70, the judgment is limited to the issue of material possession only. Who is entitled to the material and
physical possession over the property? What are the ownership issues? Section 16 of Rule 70 provides:
Section 16. Resolving defense of ownership. When the defendant raises the defense of ownership in his pleadings and the
question of possession cannot be resolved without deciding the issue of ownership, the issue of ownership shall be resolved only to
determine the issue of possession. (4a)
Therefore, what this means is that the lower court will have to come up with a provisional or preliminary findings on the issue of
ownership. Take note that there are basic rules on resolving issues of ownership. And that is enunciated in the case of Refugia vs CA
decided in 1996.
Refugia vs CA
G.R. No. 118284 (July 5, 1996)

From the FT: After due deliberation, we find and so hold that by virtue of the express mandate set forth in Section 33(2) of Batas
Pambansa Blg. 129, inferior courts have jurisdiction to resolve the question of ownership raised as an incident in an ejectment case
where a determination thereof is necessary for a proper and complete adjudication of the issue of possession. Certain guidelines,
however, must be observed in the implementation of this legislative prescription, viz.:
1. The primal rule is that the principal issue must be that of possession, and that ownership is merely ancillary thereto, in which case
the issue of ownership may be resolved but only for the purpose of determining the issue of possession. Thus, as earlier stated, the
legal provision under consideration applies only where the inferior court believes and the preponderance of evidence shows that a
resolution of the issue of possession is dependent upon the resolution of the question of ownership.
2. It must sufficiently appear from the allegations in the complaint that what the plaintiff really and primarily seeks is the restoration of
possession. Consequently, where the allegations of the complaint as well as the reliefs prayed for clearly establish a case for the
recovery of ownership, and not merely one for the recovery of possession de facto, or where the averments plead the claim of material
possession as a mere elemental attribute of such claim for ownership, or where the issue of ownership is the principal question to be
resolved, the action is not one for forcible entry but one for title to real property.
3. The inferior court cannot adjudicate on the nature of ownership where the relationship of lessor and lessee has been sufficiently
established in the ejectment case, unless it is sufficiently established that there has been a subsequent change in or termination of that
relationship between the parties. This is because under Section 2(b), Rule 131 of the Rules of Court, the tenant is not permitted to deny
the title of his landlord at the time of the commencement of the relation of landlord and tenant between them.
4. The rule in forcible entry cases, but not in those for unlawful detainer, is that a party who can prove prior possession can recover
such possession even against the owner himself. Regardless of the actual condition of the title to the property and whatever may be the
character of his prior possession, if he has in his favor priority in time, he has the security that entitles him to remain on the property
until he is lawfully ejected by a person having a better right through an accion publiciana or accion reivindicatoria. Corollarily, if prior
possession may be ascertained in some other way, then the inferior court cannot dwell upon or intrude into the issue of ownership.
5. Where the question of who has prior possession hinges on the question of who the real owner of the disputed portion is, the inferior
court may resolve the issue of ownership and make a declaration as to who among the contending parties is the real owner. In the
same vein, where the resolution of the issue of possession hinges on a determination of the validity and interpretation of the document
of title or any other contract on which the claim of possession is premised, the inferior court may likewise pass upon these issues. This
is because, and it must be so understood, that any such pronouncement made affecting ownership of the disputed portion is to be
regarded merely as provisional, hence, does not bar nor prejudice an action between the same parties involving title to the land.[26]
Moreover, Section 7, Rule 70 of the Rules of Court expressly provides that the judgment rendered in an action for forcible entry or
unlawful detainer shall be effective with respect to the possession only and in no wise bind the title or affect the ownership of the land or
building.
Maam: But like I said, it is only provisional. That particular ruling can be subject of another separate case without violating the rule on
forum shopping.
What are the jurisdictional requirements under Rule 70?
For forcible entry cases, the plaintiff must allege prior physical possession and the deprivation of the possession by means of
force, intimidation, strategy, threat or stealth. And the action is filed within the 1 year prescriptive period.
For unlawful detainer cases, the plaintiff must allege the unlawful withholding of the property and the demand to vacate. So
its very important in unlawful detainer that demand to vacate is made. The demand to vacate is jurisdictional.
Other situations requiring demand to vacate:
1. Contract to sell, when there is violation of the terms and conditions of the contract; and
2. When the possession is by tolerance.
What constitutes a valid demand to vacate?
It must be actual and definite and must be served prior to the filing of the action. It must be categorical; it must be to vacate.
Now what about if the demand is alternative? To pay or to vacate, is that valid?
NO. It must be categorical. There must be a demand to vacate. Might as well make it both, to pay and to vacate but not either.
What is the nature of the proceedings?
Like Ive said this is a (time?) procedure and this is governed by the summary procedure. There is actually no trial here, no presentation
of evidence in open court. It is all in the form of position papers.
What are the pleadings allowed?
Section 4. Pleadings allowed. The only pleadings allowed to be filed are the complaint, compulsory counterclaim and cross-claim

pleaded in the answer, and the answers thereto. All pleadings shall be verified. (3a, RSP)
There are also prohibited pleadings.
Section 13. Prohibited pleadings and motions. The following petitions, motions, or pleadings shall not be allowed:
1. Motion to dismiss the complaint except on the ground of lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter, or failure to comply with section
12;
2. Motion for a bill of particulars;
3. Motion for new trial, or for reconsideration of a judgment, or for reopening of trial;
4. Petition for relief from judgment;
5. Motion for extension of time to file pleadings, affidavits or any other paper;
6. Memoranda;
7. Petition for certiorari, mandamus, or prohibition against any interlocutory order issued by the court;
8. Motion to declare the defendant in default;
9. Dilatory motions for postponement;
10.Reply;
11. Third-party complaints;
12. Interventions. (19a, RSP)
The testimonial evidence would be in the form of affidavits to be attached to your position paper. But if you dont have the affidavit, so
long as the petition or complaint is verified, then that would suffice. If youre the plaintiff, you can also avail of preliminary injunction or
mandatory injunction under Section 15 to restore possession, and this must be filed within 5 days from the filing of the complaint.
Section 15. Preliminary injunction. The court may grant preliminary injunction, in accordance with the provisions of Rule 58
hereof, to prevent the defendant from committing further acts of dispossession against the plaintiff.
A possessor deprived of his possession through forcible from the filing of the complaint, present a motion in the action for forcible entry
or unlawful detainer for the issuance of a writ of preliminary mandatory injunction to restore him in his possession. The court shall
decide the motion within thirty (30) days from the filing thereof.
Take note that if the case is on appeal, the preliminary injunction pending appeal may be issued by the appellate court within 10 days
from perfection of appeal.
Who are bound by the judgment? It is binding against:
1. All parties and all persons claiming under them;
2. Trespassers, squatters, or agents of the defendants occupying the property;
3. Transferees pendent lite;
4. Sub-lessees;
5. Members of the family and other relatives; and
6. Other privies to the contract
The judgment is only conclusive to the issue of possession and not on ownership.
How about the judgment award? Under Section 17:
Section 17. Judgment. If after trial court finds that the allegations of the complaint are true, it shall render judgment in favor of the
plaintiff for the restitution of the premises, the sum justly due as arrears of rent or as reasonable compensation for the use and
occupation of the premises, attorney's fees and costs. If a counterclaim is established, the court shall render judgment for the sum
found in arrears from either party and award costs as justice requires.
Take note that the damages will only be centered on unpaid rents, as well as reasonable compensation for the use of the property.
Moral damages and other kinds of damages are not allowed. So very limited damages are entertained under Rule 70. Only those actual
damages in the form of rent or reasonable compensation, attorneys fees and costs. If you want to claim more than that, then you have
to file a separate action.
The judgment can be appealed to the Regional Trial Court. What happens after the judgment has been rendered? It becomes
immediately executory under Section 19.
Section 19. Immediate execution of judgment; how to stay same. If judgment is rendered against the defendant, execution shall
issue immediately upon motion unless an appeal has been perfected and the defendant to stay execution files a sufficient supersedeas
bond, approved by the Municipal Trial Court and executed in favor of the plaintiff to pay the rents, damages, and costs accruing down to
the time of the judgment appealed from, and unless, during the pendency of the appeal, he deposits with the appellate court the
amount of rent due from time to time under the contract, if any, as determined by the judgment of the Municipal Trial Court. In the
absence of a contract, he shall deposit with the Regional Trial Court the reasonable value of the use and occupation of the premises for
the preceding month or period at the rate determined by the judgment of the lower court on or before the tenth day of each succeeding
month or period. The supersedeas bond shall be transmitted by the Municipal Trial Court, with the papers, to the clerk of the Regional
Trial Court to which the action is appealed.

All amounts so paid to the appellate court shall be deposited with said court or authorized government depositary bank, and shall be
held there until the final disposition of the appeal, unless the court, by agreement of the interested parties, or in the absence of
reasonable grounds of opposition to a motion to withdraw, or for justifiable reasons, shall decree otherwise. Should the defendant fail to
make the payments above prescribed from time to time during the pendency of the appeal, the appellate court, upon motion of the
plaintiff, and upon proof of such failure, shall order the execution of the judgment appealed from with respect to the restoration of
possession, but such execution shall not be a bar to the appeal taking its course until the final disposition thereof on the merits.
After the case is decided by the Regional Trial Court, any money paid to the court by the defendant for purposes of the stay of
execution shall be disposed of in accordance with the provisions of the judgment of the Regional Trial Court. In any case wherein it
appears that the defendant has been deprived of the lawful possession of land or building pending the appeal by virtue of the execution
of the judgment of the Municipal Trial Court, damages for such deprivation of possession and restoration of possession and restoration
of possession may be allowed the defendant in the judgment of the Regional Trial Court disposing of the appeal. (8a)
Now if youre the defendant and the judgment is not favorable to you, what do you do in order to prevent immediate execution
of the judgment? You have to comply with the following under Section 19:
1. You have to perfect an appeal;
2. File a sufficient supersedeas bond;
3. During the pendency of the appeal, you must deposit with the appellate court the amount of rent due from time to time under
the contract.
Normally, the supersedeas bond would be in the same amount as the amount of damages adjudged in the judgment. If you do
not comply with any of these requisites, then the execution will follow. There is no stay or suspension of the execution of the judgment.
That is also one of the effects of the summary procedure, that judgment is immediately executory.
Supposing youre able to successfully stay the execution of the judgment when you appealed the decision to the RTC but the
RTC affirm the adverse judgment against you. So you go now to the CA under Rule 42. What now is your remedy against the
immediate execution of the judgment that was affirmed by the appellate court? Can you avail of the same procedure in order
to stay the execution?
No more. You have to ask now the CA to issue an injunction or TRO for the judgment to be stayed. But if you cannot convince them,
sorry made-demolish ka na.

SUMMARY OF THE DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN FORCIBLE ENTRY AND UNLAWFUL DETAINER

FORCIBLE ENTRY
UNLAWFUL DETAINER
As to purpose
Restitution of possession, damages and costs
As to period of filing
One year from the dispossession by
One year from demand or from the time the
force, intimidation, strategy, threat or
possession becomes unlawful
stealth
As to jurisdictional
Plaintiff must allege prior physical
Plaintiff must allege the unlawful
requirements
possession and the deprivation of the
withholding of the property and the demand
possession by means specified above
to vacate is made

RULE 71
CONTEMPT

Rule 71 applies to contempt proceedings in court and also before quasi-judicial agencies with no contempt powers. So if the quasijudicial agency has no contempt powers, then you have to apply in court to cite the party in contempt. Rule 71 also applies suppletorily
to the contempt rules of quasi-judicial agencies with contempt powers.

Take note that contempt is an inherent power of the courts, mainly, for the preservation of order in judicial proceedings and to the
enforcement of judgments.

Two-fold aspects of contempt

1.

Proper punishment of the guilty party

2.

Compel the performance of a certain act

Kinds of contempt
1.

Criminal if the main purpose is to punish in order to avenge the disrespect that was done to the authority or dignity of the
court or the judge acting judiciary. It is punitive in nature.

2.

Civil if it is to require the doing of an act for the benefit of the other party. The offense here is directed against the party and
not against the authority of the court.

Take note that as far as presumption is concerned, civil contempt has no presumption. In criminal contempt, there is a presumption of
innocence in favor of the defendant. How do you characterize whether it is civil or criminal contempt?
You look at the purpose. If it is to punish, its criminal. If its to compel the performance of an act to benefit a party, it is civil.

Under the Rules, there are two kinds of contempt:

1.

DIRECT

Section 1. Direct contempt punished summarily. A person guilty of misbehavior in the presence of or so near a court as to
obstruct or interrupt the proceedings before the same, including disrespect toward the court, offensive personalities toward others, or
refusal to be sworn or to answer as a witness, or to subscribe an affidavit or deposition when lawfully required to do so, may be
summarily adjudged in contempt by such court and punished by a fine not exceeding two thousand pesos or imprisonment not
exceeding ten (10) days, or both, if it be a Regional Trial Court or a court of equivalent or higher rank, or by a fine not exceeding two
hundred pesos or imprisonment not exceeding one (1) day, or both, if it be a lower court. (1a)

Penalties:
If against the RTC or higher rank Fine not exceeding Php 2,000 or imprisonment not exceeding 10 days or both
If against the lower court Fine not exceeding Php 200 or imprisonment not exceeding 1 day or both

What is the remedy if you are cited in direct contempt?

Section 2. Remedy therefrom. The person adjudged in direct contempt by any court may not appeal therefrom, but may avail
himself of the remedies of certiorari or prohibition. The execution of the judgment shall be suspended pending resolution of such

petition, provided such person files a bond fixed by the court which rendered the judgment and conditioned that he will abide by and
perform the judgment should the petition be decided against him. (2a)

2.

INDIRECT

Section 3. Indirect contempt to be punished after charge and hearing. After a charge in writing has been filed, and an
opportunity given to the respondent to comment thereon within such period as may be fixed by the court and to be heard by himself or
counsel, a person guilty of any of the following acts may be punished for indirect contempt;
(a)

Misbehavior of an officer of a court in the performance of his official duties or in his official transactions;

(b)
Disobedience of or resistance to a lawful 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 induces another to enter into or upon such real property, for the purpose of executing acts of ownership or possession, or in
any manner disturbs the possession given to the person adjudged to be entitled thereto;
(c)
Any abuse of or any unlawful interference with the processes or proceedings of a court not constituting direct contempt under
section 1 of this Rule;
(d)

Any improper conduct tending, directly or indirectly, to impede, obstruct, or degrade the administration of justice;

(e)

Assuming to be an attorney or an officer of a court, and acting as such without authority;

(f)

Failure to obey a subpoena duly served;

(g)
The rescue, or attempted rescue, of a person or property in the custody of an officer by virtue of an order or process of a court
held by him.
But nothing in this section shall be so construed as to prevent the court from issuing process to bring the respondent into court, or from
holding him in custody pending such proceedings. (3a)

In indirect contempt, there is due process. There is a certain procedure to be followed before you can be cited or adjudged guilty of
contempt. What is the penalty? It is much higher.

Section 7. Punishment for indirect contempt. If the respondent is adjudged guilty of indirect contempt committed against a
Regional Trial Court or a court of equivalent or higher rank, he may be punished by a fine not exceeding thirty thousand pesos or
imprisonment not exceeding six (6) months, or both. If he is adjudged guilty of contempt committed against a lower court, he may be
punished by a fine not exceeding five thousand pesos or imprisonment not exceeding one (1) month, or both. If the contempt consists
in the violation of a writ of injunction, temporary restraining order or status quo order, he may also be ordered to make complete
restitution to the party injured by such violation of the property involved or such amount as may be alleged and proved.
The writ of execution, as in ordinary civil actions, shall issue for the enforcement of a judgment imposing a fine unless the court
otherwise provides. (6a)

Penalties:

If against the RTC or higher rank Fine not exceeding Php 30,000 or imprisonment not exceeding 6 months or both
If against the lower court Fine not exceeding Php 5,000 or imprisonment not exceeding 1 month or both

In direct contempt, the citation is summary and no hearing is required. In indirect contempt, there must be a written charge, and a
notice and hearing. The remedy for direct contempt is certiorari or prohibition, and for indirect contempt, appeal.

Take note that under Section 3(d) on indirect contempt, you have there the rule on publications of decisions of the courts. There are
certain instances that it can be considered contemptuous and may be subject of contempt proceedings. Generally, there can be no
contempt in publications for as long as the criticism of the court is fair and there is no malice intended. But if there is an insult already
and personal attack against the judge, then the one publishing the article may be held liable for indirect contempt.

What is the procedure?

-

For direct contempt, there is really no procedure prescribed under Rule 71. You will be cited summarily.

For indirect contempt, there is a certain procedure. You have a written charge, it could be in a form of a petition by the other
party or an order issued by the court directing the person to show cause why he should not be punished on contempt. It can
be initiated by the court motu proprio or by a verified petition.

Take note that if the act complained of arose from the case or a principal action in court, then the petition for contempt shall also be
heard by that court although separately docketed and in a separate proceeding unless the court itself will require the consolidation of
the contempt proceeding with the principal action from which it arose.

Where do you file it?

If it is contempt against an inferior court, quasi-judicial agency with no contempt powers, file it with the RTC. The Supreme Court may
cause investigation of contempt by a prosecuting officer and charged right by the RTC. And where the act of contempt is against two or
more courts, the contempt charge may be filed and heard in any of the involved courts.

Now if the appeal has been perfected in a case, then the court will lose jurisdiction over the contempt proceedings.

There can be an arrest in indirect contempt when the defendant fails to appear. However, he can post bail after. So you notice here,
there is no service of summons because when you file a petition for contempt, you furnished the defendant immediately. And the court
will simply require the defendant to submit his comment or answer.

If it is initiated by the court, then it will issue a show-cause order addressed to the defendant who will submit his answer. Thereafter, the
hearing will be conducted.

SUMMARY OF THE DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN DIRECT AND INDIRECT CONTEMPT

DIRECT

INDIRECT

As to who may be held

liable

A person guilty of misbehavior in the

presence of or so near a court as to
obstruct or interrupt the proceedings
before the same, including disrespect
toward the court, offensive personalities
toward others, or refusal to be sworn or
to answer as a witness, or to subscribe
an affidavit or deposition when lawfully
required to do so.

A person guilty of any of the acts

enumerated under Section 3.

As to penalties

If against the RTC or higher rank Fine

not
exceeding
Php
2,000
or
imprisonment not exceeding 10 days or
both

If against the RTC or higher rank Fine not

exceeding Php 30,000 or imprisonment not
exceeding 6 months or both

If against the lower court Fine not

exceeding Php 200 or imprisonment not
exceeding 1 day or both

As to procedure

No
prescribed
summarily

procedure;

done

If against the lower court Fine not

exceeding Php 5,000 or imprisonment not
exceeding 1 month or both

There is a certain procedure followed.

(Please refer above)

Pointers: Make sure that you are very familiar with the Rules and the basic distinctions, the requisites and the specific peculiarities of
the Rules.