CHAPTER 3: Special Civil Actions 1.

Upon filing of the complaint, the court

I. Interpleader (Rule 62)
A. Requisites
Rule 62, Sec.1
1. The plaintiff claims no interest in the
subject matter or his claim is not
disputed
2. There must be at least 2 or more
conflicting claimants
3. The parties to be interpleaded must
make effective claims, and
4. The subject matter must be one and
the same.
B. Rules
Interpleader was allowed in the following
cases:
1. Pagkalinawan vs. Rodas (1948):
Action by a lessee who does not know
to whom to pay rentals due to
conflicting claims on the property.
2. Mesina vs. IAC (1986): Action by a
bank where the purchaser of a
cashiers check claims it was lost and
another has presented it for payment.
shall issue an order requiring the
conflicting claimants to interplead
with one another.
2. The court, in the same order
mentioned, may direct that the
subject matter of the suit be paid or
delivered to the court.
3. Summons shall be accompanied by
copies of the complaint and the order
mentioned.
4. A motion to dismiss may be filed by
defendants on the following grounds:
i. Impropriety of the action for
interpleader
ii. Under Rule 16
5. Service of copy of the answer must be
filed by defendants to the plaintiff
and their co-defendants.
6. The effect of failure to plead within
the prescribed period is that, upon
motion, the defendant will be
declared in default, and thereafter
renders judgment barring him from
any claim in respect to the subject
matter.

Interpleader was disallowed in the

following cases:
1. Beltran vs. Peoples Homesite and
Housing Corp. (1969): Action where
defendants have conflicting claims
against the plaintiff.
2. Wack-Wack Gold and Country Club,
Inc. vs. Won (1976): Action where
defendant earlier sued the plaintiff
and secured a judgment which has
already become final.

C. Peculiarities

Rule 62, Sec.2

Rule 62, Sec.3

Rule 62, Sec.4

Rule 62, Sec.5

II. Declaratory Relief 1. A decision will not terminate the
uncertainty or controversy which gave
A. Requisites rise to the action.
2. The declaration or construction is not
Rule 63, Sec.1 necessary under the circumstances.

1. There must be a justiciable Exceptions to the general rule:

controversy. 1. Actions for reformation of an
2. The controversy must be between instrument
persons whose interest is adverse. 2. Actions for quieting of title
3. The parties must have legal interest in 3. Actions to consolidate ownership
the controversy. under Art. 1607 of the Civil Code
4. The controversy must be ripe for
judicial determination, and The Solicitor-General should be
5. The petition must be filed before there notified by the party assailing the same,
is a breach or violation. when a statute, executive order,
government regulation, or ordinance is
B. Peculiarities alleged to be unconstitutional.

Rule 63, Sec.6 The prosecutor or attorney of the LGU

should be notified when the validity of a
Rule 63, Sec.2 local government ordinance is in
question.
Rule 63, Sec.5

Rule 63, Sec.3

Rule 63, Sec.4

The petition must be filed before there is a

breach of contract or violation of a statute
or ordinance:
1. If before the final termination of the
case, a breach occurs, the action may
be converted into an ordinary action.
2. All persons who have or claim any
interest which would be affected by
the declaration shall be made parties.
3. The declaration shall not prejudice the
rights of persons not parties to the
action

Commissioner of Customs vs. Cloribel

(1977): Third-party complaint not allowed
(in actions for declaratory relief).

General rule: court action on the petition

is discretionary.

Effect of this general rule: The court,

motu proprio or on motion, refuse to hear
the petition in any case where:
III. Certiorari When appeal is an available remedy
AND the case does not fall under the
A. General Requisites exceptions.

Rule 65, sec.1.

1. A tribunal, board, or officer exercises

judicial or quasi-judicial functions,.
2. It or s/he acts without or in excess of
jurisdiction or with grave abuse of
discretion, and
3. There is no appeal nor plain, speedy,
and adequate remedy in the ordinary
course of law.

B. Exceptions

Exceptions to the rule that certiorari

is not a proper remedy if appeal is
available or it is lost through the fault
of petitioner:
1. Appeal is not a speedy and adequate
remedy.
2. Order is issued without or in excess of
jurisdiction.
3. In consideration of public welfare and
for the advancement of public policy.
4. Order is a patent nullity.
5. To avoid future litigation.
6. To avoid a miscarriage of justice.
7. In furtherance of the broader interest
of justice and equity.

C. Time to File

Rule 65, Sec.4.

Not later than 60 days:

From notice of the judgment, order, or
resolution.
If a motion for reconsideration or new
trial is timely filed, from notice of the
denial of said motion.

D. When NOT Proper

Rule 65, Sec.1

Asian Trading Corp. vs. CA (1999): To

assail the order of the trial court
denying a demurrer to evidence in a
civil case.
IV. Prohibition and Mandamus view of ensuring that its decision
would not be set to naught by
A. Requisites of Prohibition administrative inaction or
indifference.
Rule 65, Sec.2
Mandamus was disallowed in the
1. A tribunal, corporation, board, officer, following cases:
or person exercises judicial, quasi- 1. UP vs. Ayson (1989): Action to compel
judicial, or ministerial functions a school to enroll a student for
2. The proceedings are without or in academic deficiencies because this
excess of jurisdiction or with grave involves academic freedom.
abuse of discretion, and 2. Suanes vs. Chief Accountant of the
3. There is no appeal or other plain, Senate (1948): Action against the
speedy, and adequate remedy in the President or Congress was not allowed
ordinary course of law to be compelled by mandamus
because the Judiciary is a co-equal
branch.
B. Requisites of Mandamus
General rule: Aquino vs. Mariano (1984)
Rule 65, Sec.3
Failure to exhaust administrative
remedies is fatal to a mandamus action.
1. A tribunal, corporation, board, officer,
or person either: Exception: one Heart Sporting Club, Inc.
i. Unlawfully neglects the vs. CA (1981): When action involves
performance of an act which the purely questions of law.
law specifically enjoins as a duty
arising from an office, trust, or Certiorari vs. Prohibition vs.
station, or Mandamus:
ii. Unlawfully excludes another from
the use or enjoyment of a right or Certiorari
Prohibitio
Mandamus
office to which the plaintiff is n
entitled Annul or
Prevent Compel
Purpose of modify act
2. There is no other plain, speedy, and writ done by
commission performance
adequate remedy in the ordinary of act of act
respondent
course of law Nature of Judicial,
Judicial or
act sought quasi-
quasi- Legal duty
C. Rules to be judicial and
judicial
controlled ministerial
Mandamus was allowed in the following Person
Person
cases: exercising
exercising
1. Mnatrade/FMMC Division Employees judicial, Person
judicial or
Respondent quasi- exercising
and Workers Union vs. Bacungan quasi-
judicial or legal duty
(1986): Action to compel a corporation judicial
ministerial
to grant its monthly salaried functions
functions
employees holiday pay. Nature of
2. MMDA vs. Concerned Residents of Corrective Preventive Directory
remedy
Manila Bay (2008):
i. Generally, the writ of mandamus
lies to require the execution of a
ministerial duty.
ii. Under a continuing mandamus,
the Court may, under
extraordinary circumstances,
issue directives with the end in

V. Quo Warranto
A. Definition
A prerogative writ by which the
government can call upon any person
to show by what warrant he holds a
public office or exercises a public
franchise.
A petition is applicable when a case
involves disputes regarding the
ineligibility of a person in public
office.
If the petition is granted,
respondent will be ousted from
office but the petitioner will not
assume office.
B. Election Contest
Challenges the right of a person to
hold office on the ground of
irregularities in the conduct of the
elections.
Applicable when a case involves
disputes as to the counting of votes or
on matters connected with the
conduct of elections.
In this cases, quo warranto is not the
proper remedy, the proper remedy is
an Election Protest.
If protest is successful, the protester
assumes office if he obtains a
plurality of votes.
prosecutor commences the action at
the instance of another person.
Commencement of action is
mandatory when there is good
reason to believe that the case can
be established by proof.
In all other cases, commencement
of action is discretionary at the
request and upon relation of another
person.
Indemnity required for the expenses
and costs of the action, as determined
by the court from the requesting and
relaying person.
The motion for leave must be set for
hearing with notice to the respondent
so that he may be heard.
The court issues the order allowing
the filing of the action within the
period fixed therein which is 1 year
after the cause of ouster arose.
Damages would be granted to the
petitioner only if action for damages
commenced within one 1 year after
the entry of judgment establishing the
petitioners right to hold the office.

C. Peculiarities

Rule 66, Sec.1

Rule 66, Sec.2

Rule 66, Sec.3

Rule 66, Sec.4

Rule 66, Sec.11

It is commenced by a verified
petition brought in the name of the
Republic of the Philippines.
Leave of court must first be secured
when the Solicitor-General or a public
 regardless of the amount of the
property taken
VI. Expropriation Right to enter or take possession of
the property by the plaintiff
A. Requisites /government starts when the
following are complied with:
Rule 67, Sec.1 1. Complaint is filed (and at any time
thereafter),
Rule 67, Sec.3 2. Due notice was given to the
defendant, and
3. Deposit to the authorized
According to Article III of the 1987 depositary the assessed value, for
Constitution, and the pertinent Sections taxation purposes, of the property
of the Rules of Court: to be taken.
1. Due process of law and compliance
with Rule 67.
2. Payment of just compensation.
3. Taking must be for a public use.
B. Stages

Rule 67, Sec.5

1. Determination of authority of
plaintiff to exercise power of eminent
domain and determination of the
propriety of its exercise in the
context of the facts.
The complaint for expropriation is
terminated by either:
a. An order of dismissal of the action
or
b. An order of expropriation
Both orders are final and, therefore,
appealable
2. Determination of just
compensation.
Done with the help of not more than 3
commissioners.
Determined as of the date of the
taking of the property or the filing of
the complaint, whichever comes first.
Order fixing just compensation is also
final and appealable.

C. Peculiarities

Rule 67, Sec.2

An expropriation suit is incapable of

pecuniary estimation so that the RTC
has jurisdiction of the suit
 D. Deficiency Judgment

Rule 68, Sec.6

VII. Foreclosure of Real Estate
Mortgage
A. Foreclosure Proceedings
1. Make a finding of the amount due the
plaintiff including interest, cost and
other charges approved by the court,
2. Order the defendant to pay said
amount within a period of not less
than 90 days nor more than 120 days
from entry of judgment, and
3. If the defendant defaults, the court
should order the sale at public
auction of the mortgaged property.
A motion for deficiency judgment may
be made only after the sale and after
it becomes known that a deficiency
exists
Cannot be rendered against a non-
resident defendant
Cannot be rendered against the owner
who is not a mortgagor and has not
assumed personal liability for the
debt. The proper remedy in that case
is an ordinary action against the
debtor.
If the debtor dies, the deficiency may
be filed as a claim against his estate.

B. Right of Redemption vs. Equity of

Redemption

Right of Redemption:
It is the right granted to the debtor-
mortgagor, his successor-in-interest,
or any judicial creditor of debtor-
mortgagor or any person.
Such person having a lien in the
property subsequent to is
mortgage or deed of trust
The right under which the property is
sold in order to redeem the property
within 1 year from the registration of
the sheriffs certificate of foreclosure
sale.

Equity of Redemption:
It is the right of the defendant
mortgagor to extinguish the mortgage
and retain ownership of the property
by paying the amount fixed in the
decision of the court.
Can be exercised within 90 days to
120 days after entry of judgment or
even after the foreclosure sale but
prior to its confirmation.

C. Writ of Possesion

It is issued by the court, upon motion,

after the foreclosure sale is confirmed to
install the buyer at the auction into the
possession of the property sold.
VIII. Partition

Modes of Partition: IX. Forcible Entry and Unlawful

Partition by agreement Detainer
Partition by commissioners
A. Nature (Accion Interdictal)
A. Stages
1. A special civil action involving a
1. First Stage: Determination of the realty.
propriety of partition 2. Subject to the Rule on Summary
i. Whether the subject property is Procedure.
owned in common and whether all 3. Under the original exclusive
the co-owners are made parties to jurisdiction of first level courts or the
the case. municipal trial courts.
ii. Order of partition may also require 4. The nature of the action is determined
an accounting of rents and profits by the allegation of the complaint and
recovered by the defendant. the character of the relief sought.
5. One co-owner may institute the
iii. Order of partition is appealable.
action.
If not appealed, parties may partition B. Execution
their common property whichever way
they want. Decision immediately executory after
If appealed, second stage applies. notice of the judgment and a motion
with a notice to the adverse party.
2. Second Stage: To stay execution, defendant should:
The actual partitioning of the subject 1. Perfect his appeal in due time,
property. 2. File a sufficient supersedeas bond,
Also involves a complete proceeding, approved by the MTC, and
and the order or decision is 3. Pending appeal, deposit with the
appealable appellate court the amount of rent
due from time to time under the
B. Prescription of Action contract, if any, as determined by
Actions for partition are the judgment of the MTC on or
imprescriptible for as long as the before the 10th day of each
co-owners expressly or impliedly succeeding month.
recognize the co-ownership. Execution will not be stayed despite
If a co-owner repudiates the co- compliance with the above requisites
ownership and makes known such when the court finds that the appeal
repudiation to the other co-owners, is frivolous or dilatory
the proper remedy is not partition but
accion reivindicatoria, which is Forcible entry vs. Unlawful Detainer:
prescriptible
Forcible Unlawful
Entry Detainer
Initially
Nature of Unlawful
lawful, then
Defendants from the
becomes
Possession beginning
unlawful
Why unlawful Possession Possession
through after lease
 force,
intimidation,
contract
stealth,
expires
strategy or
threat
Need for
demand to No need Needed
vacate X. Contempt
Must be Not necessary
Proof of prior A. Kinds
proved by for plaintiff to
possession
plaintiff prove it
1 year period Date when Date of Direct contempt vs. Indirect contempt:
to file action entry was demand to
counted from forced vacate Direct Indirect
Contempt Contempt
In the Out of or not
Where the
presence of or in the
act is
so near the presence of
committed
judge the court
A written
charge or a
Necessity of
Not necessary show cause
a charge
order is
necessary
Necessity of Hearing
Not necessary
a hearing required
Appealability Not
Appealable
of judgment appealable

B. Aspects

1. Civil contempt
The failure to do something ordered to
be done by a court or a judge for the
benefit of the opposing party therein
Remedial and civil in nature

2. Criminal contempt
Conduct directed against the
authority and dignity of a court or of a
judge, as in unlawfully assailing or
discrediting the authority and dignity
of a court or a judge or in doing a
forbidden act
Punitive in nature, in the nature of a
criminal or quasi-criminal action