You are on page 1of 32

Section 10. Omitted counterclaim or cross-claim.

— When
5. Counter-claims: a pleader fails to set up a counterclaim or a cross-claim
through oversight, inadvertence, or excusable neglect, or
when justice requires, he may, by leave of court, set up
Rule 6. the counterclaim or cross-claim by amendment before
Section 2. Pleadings allowed. — The claims of a party are judgment.
asserted in a complaint, counterclaim, cross-claim, third
(fourth, etc.)-party complaint, or complaint-in-
intervention. NCC, Art. 1283. If one of the parties to a suit over an
obligation has a claim for damages against the other, the
The defenses of a party are alleged in the answer to the former may set it off by proving his right to said damages
pleading asserting a claim against him. and the amount thereof.
An answer may be responded to by a reply.

RSC, Section 13. Counterclaims Within the Coverage of


Section 6. Counterclaim. — A counterclaim is any claim this Rule - If at the time the action is commenced, the
which a defending party may have against an opposing defendant possesses a claim against the plaintiff that (a)
party. is within the coverage of this rule, exclusive of interest and
costs; (b) arises out of the same transaction or event that
Section 7 Compulsory counterclaim. — A compulsory is the subject matter of the plaintiff's claim; (c) does not
counterclaim is one which, being cognizable by the require for its adjudication the joinder of third parties; and
regular courts of justice, arises out of or is connected with (d) is not the subject of another pending action, the
the transaction or occurrence constituting the subject claim shall be filed as a counterclaim in the response;
matter of the opposing party's claim and does not require otherwise, the defendant shall be barred from suit on the
for its adjudication the presence of third parties of whom counterclaim.
the court cannot acquire jurisdiction. Such a The defendant may also elect to the file a counterclaim
counterclaim must be within the jurisdiction of the court against the plaintiff that does not arise out of the same
both as to the amount and the nature thereof, except transaction or occurrence, provided that the amount
that in an original action before the Regional Trial Court, and nature thereof are within the coverage of this Rule
the counter-claim may be considered compulsory and the prescribed docket and the other legal fees are
regardless of the amount. paid.

Section 9. Counter-counterclaims and counter- RSP, Section 3, A. Pleadings allowed. — The only
crossclaims. — A counter-claim may be asserted against pleadings allowed to be filed are the complaints,
an original counter-claimant. compulsory counterclaims and cross-claims' pleaded in
A cross-claim may also be filed against an original cross- the answer, and the answers thereto.
claimant. RSP, Section 5. Answer. — Within ten (10) days from
service of summons, the defendant shall file his answer to
the complaint and serve a copy thereof on the plaintiff.
Rule 9
Affirmative and negative defenses not pleaded therein
Section 2 Compulsory counterclaim, or cross-claim, not shall be deemed waived, except for lack of jurisdiction
set up barred. — A compulsory counterclaim, or a cross- over the subject matter. Cross-claims and compulsory
claim, not set up shall be barred. counterclaims not asserted in the answer shall be
considered barred. The answer to counterclaims or cross-
claims shall be filed and served within ten (10) days from
Rule 11.
service of the answer in which they are pleaded.
Section 4. Answer to counterclaim or cross-claim. — A
counterclaim or cross-claim must be
answered within ten (10) days from service. Definition - Any claim which a defending party may have
against an opposing party.

Section 8. Existing counterclaim or cross-claim. — A 1. A counterclaim is in the nature of a cross-


compulsory counterclaim or a cross-claim that a complaint. Although it may be alleged in the
defending party has at the time he files his answer shall answer, it is not part of the answer.
be contained therein. 2. Upon its filing, the same proceedings are had as
in the original complaint.
3. For this reason, it must be answered 10 days from
Section 9. Counterclaim or cross-claim arising after
service [Rule 11, Sec 4]
answer. — A counterclaim or a cross-claim which either
4. A lawyer who acts in the name of a client should
matured or was acquired by a party after serving his
not be sued on a counterclaim in the very same
pleading may, with the permission of the court, be
case he has filed as counsel and not as party.
presented as a counterclaim or a cross-claim by
supplemental pleading before judgment. 5. Purpose: to avoid multiplicity of suits
How to Raise Counterclaims action. up in the action.
Must be answered,
1. By including it in the Answer Need not be answered; no
otherwise, the defendant
a. A compulsory counterclaim or a cross-claim default.
can be declared in default.
that a defending party has AT THE TIME he Since permissive, it requires
files his answer shall be contained therein. No need for separate the payment of docket fees
[Rule 11, Sec. 8] docket fees (Sun Insurance v. Asuncion,
b. Exception: Pleadings may be amended 1989)
under Rule 11, Sec. 10:
(1) By leave of court;
(2) Before judgment; Compulsory Counterclaim (also known as recoupment)
(3) On the grounds of:
(4) Oversight; 1. Requisites:
(5) Inadvertence; a. It must arise out of, or be necessarily
(6) Excusable neglect; connected with, the transaction/occurrence
(7) When justice requires. that is the subject matter of the opposing
party's claim;
2. By filing after the Answer [Rule 11, Sec. 9] b. It does not require for its adjudication the
a. Counterclaims/cross-claims arising AFTER the presence of third parties of whom the court
answer, cannot acquire jurisdiction;
b. How done: c. It must be within the court’s jurisdiction both
(1) By filing a supplemental pleading before as to the amount and the nature. [Regalado,
judgment citing Quintanilla v CA (1997)]
(2) WITH court’s permission  Note in another reviewer also citing
Regalado: A counterclaim may be may
be entertained by the RTC regardless of
the amount involved provided that, in
addition to the other requirements, it is
cognizable by the regular courts of
justice
Rules on Counterclaims d. The counterclaim must have matured before
answer.
1. In an original action before the RTC, the
counterclaim may be considered compulsory
regardless of the amount. [Rule 6, Sec. 7] 2. General Rule: A compulsory counterclaim not set
2. In the case of Agustin v. Bacalan (1985), if a up in the answer is deemed barred.
counterclaim is filed in the MTC in excess of its a. Exceptions:
jurisdictional amount, the excess is considered (1) If it is a counterclaim which either
waived. matured or was acquired by a party
3. But in Calo v. Ajax (1968), the remedy where a after serving his answer. In this case, it
counterclaim is beyond the jurisdiction of the may be pleaded by filing a
MTC is to set off the claims and file a separate supplemental answer or pleading before
action to collect the balance. judgment. [Rule 11, Sec. 9]
4. Although the government is generally immune (2) When a pleader fails to set up a
from suit, if it files an action against a private counterclaim through oversight,
party, it surrenders its privileged position and the inadvertence, excusable negligence, or
defendant may validly file a counterclaim when justice so requires. He may, by
against it. leave of court, set-up the counterclaim
by amendment of the pleading [Rule 11,
Sec. 10]
Kinds of Counterclaims
3. A plaintiff who fails or chooses not to answer a
Compulsory counterclaim Permissive counterclaim compulsory counterclaim may not be declared
One which arises out of or is in default, principally because the issues raised in
necessarily connected with It does not arise out of nor is the counterclaim are deemed automatically
the transaction or it necessarily connected joined by the allegations in the complaint. [Gojo
occurrence -that is the with the subject matter of v. Goyala (1970)]
subject matter of the the opposing party's claim.
opposing party's claim. 4. Filing fees do not apply to compulsory
counterclaims
Does not require for its May require for its
adjudication the presence adjudication the presence
of third parties of whom the of third parties over whom 5. The filing of a MTD and the setting up of a
court cannot acquire the court cannot acquire compulsory counterclaim are incompatible
jurisdiction. jurisdiction. remedies.
Barred if not set up in the Not barred even if not set a. In the event that a defending party has a
ground for dismissal and a compulsory court cannot acquire jurisdiction
counterclaim at the same time, he must
choose only one remedy.
b. If he decides to file a MTD, he will lose his Effect on Counterclaim when Complaint is Dismissed -
counterclaim. But if he opts to set up his Under Section 3, Rule 17, dismissal of action due to
counterclaim, he may still plead his ground plaintiff’s fault shall be without prejudice to the
for dismissal as an affirmative defense in his defendant’s right to prosecute his counterclaim in the
answer. same/separate action.
c. If any of the grounds to dismiss under Rule 17,
Sec. 3 arise, the proper recourse for a
defendant who desires to pursue his Meliton v. CA (1992) – Regalado, J.
compulsory counterclaim in the same
proceeding is not a MTD. Plaintiff: Nelia Ziga, in her own behalf and as attorney-in-
d. Instead, he should only move to have the fact of Alex A. Ziga and Emma A. Ziga-Siy
plaintiff declared non-suited on the
Defendant: Lydia Meliton
complaint so that the latter can no longer
present his evidence thereon, and
Concept: Counter-claims
simultaneously move that he be declared as
in default on the compulsory counterclaim, Nature of Action: Appeal by certiorari from order of CA
and reserve the right to present evidence ex
parte on his compulsory counterclaim. [BA Doctrine: It has been postulated that while a number of
Finance v. Co (1993)] criteria have been advanced for the determination of
whether the counterclaim is compulsory or permissive, the
"one compelling test of compulsoriness" is the logical
Permissive Counterclaim (also known as “set-off”) relationship between the claim alleged in the complaint
and that in the counterclaim, that is, where conducting
1. Counterclaim is permissive if it does not arise out
separate trials of the respective claims of the parties
of, nor is necessarily connected with, the subject
would entail a substantial duplication of effort and time,
matter of the opposing party’s claim
as where they involve many of the same factual and/or
a. This is not barred even if not set up in the
legal issues.
action
b. Must have independent jurisdictional ground FACTS: Nelia Ziga filed for rescission of a contract of lease
[Herrera)]. Hence, the filing of a separate over a parcel of land situated at Elias Angeles Street,
docket fee. Naga City. Alleged as grounds therefor were Meliton's
failure, as lessee, to deposit the one month rental and to
2. Test to determine whether a counterclaim is pay the monthly rentals due, her construction of a
compulsory or permissive: LOGICAL RELATIONSHIP concrete wall and roof on the site of a demolished house
TEST on the leased premises without the lessor's written
a. Logical relationship test: Where conducting consent, and unauthorized sublease of the leased
separate trials of the respective claims would property to a third party. Meliton filed an answer to the
entail substantial duplication of effort and complaint denying the material averments thereof and
time and involves many of the same factual setting up three counterclaims for recovery of the value
and legal issues. [Meliton v. CA (1992)] of her kitchenette constructed on the leased parcel of
b. Other tests used land and which was demolished by Ziga. The RTC
 Issues of fact and law raised by the claim dismissed complaint for being moot and academic. The
and counterclaim are essentially the counter-claim was likewise dismissed for non-payment of
same the docket fees, ergo the trial court's holding that thereby
 Res judicata would bar a subsequent suit it had not acquired jurisdiction over the same. Lydia
or defendant’s claim absent the Meliton and Virgilio Meliton filed a complaint for recovery
compulsory counterclaim rule of the same amounts involved and alleged in their
counterclaims. Ziga filed a motion to dismiss alleging that
 Substantially the same evidence support
the petition is barred by prior judgment.
or refute the claim and the counterclaim
 There is a logical relation between the RTC: Denied MTD. The dismissal of the Meliton’s
claim and the counterclaim counterclaims was not an adjudication on the merits as
the court did not acquire jurisdiction over the
3. NOTE: If the counterclaim matures AFTER the counterclaims for failure of Meliton to pay the docket
Answer, it is merely PERMISSIVE fees, hence the said dismissal does not constitute a bar to
the filing of the later complaint.
4. Filing fees apply to permissive counterclaims
CA: The Meliton’s counterclaim against Ziga was a
compulsory counterclaim, it having (arisen) out of or
5. Even when there is a logical relation but the being necessarily connected with the transaction or
court has no jurisdiction over the claim or it occurrence subject matter of the petitioner's complaint.
requires the presence of third persons whom the The failure of the Meliton to seek a reconsideration of the
dismissal of their counterclaim or to take an appeal must concur: (1) the judgment must be final; (2)
therefrom rendered the dismissal final. Such dismissal the judgment must have been rendered by a
barred the prosecution of their counterclaim by another court having jurisdiction over the subject matter
action. and the parties; (3) the judgment must be on the
merits; and (4) there must be between the first
ISSUES: and second actions, identity of parties, of subject
matter, and of causes of action.
1. WoN the counterclaims of the Melitons are - The first case was dismissed upon motion of Ziga,
compulsory in nature (YES) plaintiff therein, under Sec. 2 of Rule 17. Dismissal
2. WoN the Melitons, having failed to seek thereunder is without prejudice, except when
reconsideration of or to take an appeal from the otherwise stated in the motion to dismiss or when
order of dismissal of their counterclaims, are already stated to be with prejudice in the order of the
barred from asserting the same in another action (NO) court. The order of dismissal of the first case was
RATIO: unqualified, hence without prejudice and,
therefore, does not have the effect of an
1. YES; all the requisites of a compulsory counterclaim adjudication on the merits. On a parity of
are present. rationale, the same rule should apply to a
- The counterclaims, as this term is now broadly counterclaim duly interposed therein and which
defined, are logically related to the complaint. is likewise dismissed but not on the merits thereof.
Ziga’s complaint was for rescission of the - In the same order of dismissal of the complaint,
contract of lease due to petitioner Lydia Meliton's the counterclaims of Meliton were dismissed by
breach of her obligations under the said reason of the fact the court a quo had not
contract. On the other hand, Meliton’s acquired jurisdiction over the same for non-
counterclaims were for damages for unlawful payment of the docket fees. On that score, the
demolition of the improvements she introduced said dismissal was also without prejudice. A
pursuant to her leasehold occupancy of the dismissal on the ground of lack of jurisdiction
premises, as well as for the filing of that civil suit does not constitute res judicata, there having
which is contended to be clearly unfounded. been no consideration and adjudication of the
- Both the claims therein arose from the same case on the merits. The dismissal of the case
contract of lease. The rights and obligations of without prejudice indicates the absence of a
the parties, as well as their potential liability for decision on the merits and leaves the parties free
damages, emanated from the same contractual to litigate the matter in a subsequent action as
relation. Melitons' right to claim damages for the though the dismissal action had not been
unlawful demolition of the improvements they commenced.
introduced on the land was based on their right - A reading of the order of dismissal will show that
of possession under the contract of lease which is the trial court, in dismissing the complaint of Ziga,
precisely the very same contract sought to be did not intend to prejudice the claims of Meliton
rescinded by Ziga in her complaint. The two by barring the subsequent judicial enforcement
actions are but the consequences of the thereof.
reciprocal obligations imposed by law upon and - Meliton’s claims for damages in the three
assumed by the parties under their aforesaid counterclaims interposed in said case, although
lease contract. in the nature of compulsory counterclaims but in
- In actions for ejectment or for recovery of light of the aforesaid reservation in the dismissal
possession of real property, it is well settled that order, are consequently independent causes of
the defendant's claims for the value of the action which can be the subject of a separate
improvements on the property or necessary action against Ziga.
expenses for its preservation are required to be
interposed in the same action as compulsory
counterclaims. In such cases, it is the refusal of DISPOSITIVE: CA Decision REVERSED and SET ASIDE. Case
the defendant to vacate or surrender possession is ordered REINSTATED.
of the premises that serves as the vital link in the
chain of facts and events, and which constitutes Francisco Motors Corporation v Court of Appeals (1999) -
the transaction upon which the plaintiff bases his Quisumbing, J.
cause of action. It is likewise an "important part of Plaintiff: Francisco Motors
the transaction constituting the subject matter of Defendant: Sps Gregorio and Librada Manuel
the counterclaim" of defendant for the value of Concept:
the improvements or the necessary expenses
incurred for the preservation of the property. Brief facts: FMC filed a complaint against the Sps Manuel
They are offshoots of the same basic controversy to recover a sum of money (for the purchase and repair
between the parties, that is, the right of either to of a jeep body). The spouses interposed a counterclaim
the possession of the property. for unpaid legal services by Gregorio Manuel against the
2. NO; Section 4, Rule 9 is not applicable to the incorporators, directors and officers of FMC. The TC
case at bar. decided the case in favour of FMC, but also allowed the
- In order that a prior judgment will constitute a bar counterclaim. For failure of FMC to answer the
to a subsequent case, the following requisites counterclaim, the TC declared it in default and evidence
ex parte was presented. FMC was held liable for the legal Doctrine: GENERAL RULE: A compulsory counterclaim
fees through the doctrine of the piercing of the corporate cannot be made the subject of a separate action but
veil. should be asserted in the same suit involving the same
transaction or occurrence giving rise to it. EXCEPTION:
Doctrine: A counterclaim or cross-claim must be When a pleader fails to set up a counterclaim through
answered within 10 days from service (Sec 4, Rule 11). oversight, inadvertence, or excusable negligence, or
Summons is not necessary. when justice requires, he may, by leave of court, set up
the counterclaim or cross-claim by amendment before
ISSUES: judgment.
1. WON the doctrine of piercing the corporate veil has
application here. (NO) ISSUES:
2. WON there was jurisdiction over FMC with respect to WON the money claim had been barred for not being set
the counterclaim. (YES) up as a compulsory counterclaim. (YES, but, also, NO)

RATIO: RATIO:
1. NO; the corporate veil cannot be pierced. YES, but, also, NO; substantial justice requires that the
- The move to recover unpaid legal fees through a proceedings be affirmed.
counterclaim against FMC, to offset the unpaid - GENERAL RULE: A compulsory
balance of the purchase and repair of a jeep body counterclaim cannot be made
could only result from an obvious misapprehension the subject of a separate action
that FMC’s corporate assets could be used to but should be asserted in the
answer for the liabilities of its individual directors, same suit involving the same
officers and incorporators. Whatever obligation transaction or occurrence giving
they incurred, it was incurred in their personal rise to it.
capacity. EXCEPTION: When a pleader fails to set up a
2. YES; summons is not necessary. counterclaim through oversight, inadvertence, or
- Section 4, Rule 11 provides that a counterclaim or excusable negligence, or when justice requires,
cross-claim must be answered within 10 days from he may, by leave of court, set up the
service. Nothing in the Rules says that summons counterclaim or cross-claim by amendment
should first be served on the defendant before an before judgment.
answer to a counterclaim must be made. - There is nothing in the nature of a special civil
- Although a counterclaim is treated as an entirely action for declaratory relief that proscribes the filing
distinct and independent action, the defendant of a counterclaim based on the same transaction,
in the counterclaim, being the plaintiff in the deed or contract subject of the complaint.
original complaint, has already submitted to the - IDEALLY, the separate action for collection should
jurisdiction of the court. have been dismissed and set up as a compulsory
counterclaim in the declaratory relief suits by way
DISPOSITIVE: Petition GRANTED insofar as it held FMC of an amended answer. Under the circumstances,
liable for the legal obligation owing to Gregorio Manuel. it would be to do violence to substantial justice to
pronounce the proceedings fatally defective for
breach of the rule on compulsory counterclaims.
Visayan Packing Corporation v Reparations Commission
(1987) - Narvasa, J. DISPOSITIVE: Petition DISMISSED.
Plaintiff: VISPAC
Defendant: REPACOM
Concept: Compulsory Counterclaim 6. Cross-claims

Brief facts: VISPAC and REPACOM entered into a RULE 6


“Contract of Conditional Purchse and Sale of Reparation Kinds of Pleadings
Goods”. Before the first installment was due, REPACOM
sent VISPAC a written reminder. VISPAC then Section 2. Pleadings allowed. — The claims of a party are
commenced 2 special civil actions for declaratory relief asserted in a complaint, counterclaim, cross-claim, third
because the agreement’s alleged failure to clearly state (fourth, etc.)-party complaint, or complaint-in-
the precise time when the obligation to pay the first intervention.
instalment of the price would arise. VISPAC subsequently The defenses of a party are alleged in the answer to the
failed to pay the first instalment so REPACOM instituted an pleading asserting a claim against him.
ordinary civil action for collection. VISPAC move to An answer may be responded to by a reply. (n)
dismiss the collection suit on the ground of the pendency
of the declaratory relief action. The Motion to Dismiss was Section 8. Cross-claim. — A cross-claim is any claim by
denied. On October 1962, the declaratory relief actions one party against a co-party arising out of the
were dismissed, holding that the issues raised would be transaction or occurrence that is the subject matter
necessarily threshed out in the collection suit. In March either of the original action or of a counterclaim therein.
1963, VISPAC was also ordered to pay REPACOM. Such cross-claim may include a claim that the party
against whom it is asserted is or may be liable to the
cross-claimant for all or part of a claim asserted in the RULE 9
action against the cross-claimant. (7) Effect of Failure to Plead

Section 9. Counter-counterclaims and counter-cross- Section 2. Compulsory counterclaim, or cross-claim, not


claims. — A counter-claim may be asserted against an set up barred. — A compulsory counterclaim, or a cross-
original counter-claimant. claim, not set up shall be barred. (4a)
A cross-claim may also be filed against an original cross-
claimant. (n)
- A counterclaim not set up shall be barred if it
arises out of or is necessarily connected with the
- Where the cross-claim arises from the complaint transaction or occurrence that is the subject
of the plaintiffs and is not separable from that matter of the opposing party’s claim and does
main action, the dismissal of the complaint not require for its adjudication the presence of
against all the defendants carries with it the third parties whom the court cannot acquire
dismissal of the cross-claim that is defensive in jurisdiction.
character because such cross-claim could only - A pleader who fails to set up a counterclaim or
succeed of the plaintiffs succeed. (Gubat) cross-claim through oversight, inadvertence, or
- Requisites: excusable negligence, or when justice requires,
(1) A claim by one party against a co-party; he may, by leave of court, set it up by way of
(2) It must arise out of the subject matter of the amendment prior to judgment. (Sec. 10, Rule 11)
complaint or of the counterclaim;
(3) The cross-claimant is prejudiced by the claim
against him by the opposing party

- The cross-claimants cannot claim more rights


than the plaintiffs themselves, on whose cause of
action the cross-claim depends.
- A cross-claimant is not the proper party to bring RULE 11
an appeal. However, where the cross-claimant When to File Responsive Pleadings
files a separate answer making common cause
with the plaintiffs, his answer with cross-claim is, in Section 4. Answer to counterclaim or cross-claim. — A
effect, a complaint against his co-defendants; counterclaim or cross-claim must be answered within ten
hence such cross-claimant could file a separate (10) days from service. (4)
petition for review with the CA. [Ruiz Jr. v CA
(1992, 1993)] Section 8. Existing counterclaim or cross-claim. — A
- General Rule: A cross-claim is always compulsory. compulsory counterclaim or a cross-claim that a
A cross-claim not set up shall be barred. [Rule 9, defending party has at the time he files his answer shall
Sec. 2] be contained therein. (8a, R6)
- Exceptions: Permissive Cross-Claims
o When it is outside the court’s jurisdiction; Section 9. Counterclaim or cross-claim arising after

 answer. — A counterclaim or a cross-claim which either
o If the court cannot acquire jurisdiction 
 matured or was acquired by a party after serving his
over third parties whose presence is pleading may, with the permission of the court, be
necessary for the adjudication of said presented as a counterclaim or a cross-claim by
cross-claim. In this case, the cross-claim is supplemental pleading before judgment. (9, R6)
considered permissive. 

o Cross claim that may mature or may be Section 10. Omitted counterclaim or cross-claim. — When
acquired AFTER service of Answer 
 a pleader fails to set up a counterclaim or a cross-claim
- Improper Cross-Claims
 through oversight, inadvertence, or excusable neglect, or
o Where the cross-claim is improper, the when justice requires, he may, by leave of court, set up
remedy is certiorari (Malinao v. Luzon the counterclaim or cross-claim by amendment before
Surety, 1964) judgment. (3, R9)
o The dismissal of a cross-claim is 

unappealable when the order dismissing - Although this rule is couched in mandatory
the complaint becomes final and language, it is believed that a compulsory
executory (Ruiz, Jr. v. CA, 1993) 
 counterclaim need not be answered especially
o A cross-claim is not allowed after when the compulsory counterclaim merely
declaration of default of cross-claimant reiterates special defenses which are deemed
(Tan v. Dimayuga, 1962) It would be controverted even without a reply, or raises issues
tantamount to setting aside the order of which are deemed automatically joined by the
default because then the cross-claimant allegations of the complaint.
would re-obtain a standing in court as - However, a compulsory counterclaim which
party litigant 
 raises issues not covered by the complaint should
be answered, otherwise the defendant may be
declared in default with respect to such
counterclaim.
- If the counterclaim is permissive, it must be Republic vs Central Surety (1968) – Callejo Sr., J
answered within the reglementary period of ten Petitioner: Republic of the Philippines
(10) days from service of answer containing such Respondents: Central Surety and Insurance Co.
counterclaim. Third Party Plaintiff: Central Surety and Insurance Co.
Third Party Defendant: Po Kee Kam, et. Al.
Concept: Third Party Complaint
7. Third-party complaint
Doctrine: A third-party complaint is anancillary suit which
RULE 6 depends on the jurisdiction of the court over the main
Kinds of Pleadings action.

Section 11. Third, (fourth, etc.)—party complaint. — A FACTS:


third (fourth, etc.) — party complaint is a claim that a
RP filed suit against the Central Surety for a bond Central
defending party may, with leave of court, file against a
person not a party to the action, called the third (fourth, executed in favor of the Deportation Board a bond in the
etc.) — party defendant for contribution, indemnity, amount of P5,000 for the temporary release of Po Kee
subrogation or any other relief, in respect of his Kam, a Chinese citizen and respondent in deportation
opponent's claim. (12a) proceeding. Po Kee Kam failed to appear at the
scheduled hearing. Central failed to remit the bond to
- It is an action actually independent of, separate the RP despite due notice. Central then filed a third-party
and distinct from the plaintiff’s complaint” such complaint, with leave of court, against Po Kee Kam and
that, were it not for the Rules of Court, it would be
Tony Go. RTC dismissed 3rd Party complaint against Po
necessary to file the action separately from the
original complaint by the defendant against the Kee Kam and Tony Go (the third-party complaint was
third party. (Gubat) filed after the passage of the new law conferring original
- Predicated on the need for expediency and the jurisdiction on the Municipal Court in civil cases involving
avoidance of unnecessary lawsuits. (Gubat) not more than P10,000.00, and it likewise appearing that
- The rule is that a trial court which has jurisdiction the third-party complaint refers to a claim of only
over the main action, also has jurisdiction over P6,000.00).
the third party complaint, even though said court
would have had no jurisdiction over it had it
been filed as an independent action. ISSUE:
(Regalado) WON RTC had jurisdiction over the 3 rd Party Complaint?
- When admitted by the court, the third-party (YES)
defendant must be served summons together
with a copy of the third party complaint so the RATIO:
court will acquire jurisdiction over him. It is true that the third-party complaint was filed after the
- Matters, which should be threshed out
effectivity date of Republic Act 3828. It is likewise true that
separately, cannot be joined to the original
action by means of a third-party complaint. the demand therein made does not exceed P10,000,
- It cannot be filed in a special civil action for and, therefore, is not within the jurisdiction of the Court of
declaratory relief as no material relief is sought in First Instance if it were an independent action. But the
such action. third-party complaint is an ancillary suit which depends
- Tests for admissibility: on the jurisdiction of the court over the main action. Since
(1) Whether it arises out of the same
the trial court had acquired jurisdiction over the
transaction on which the plaintiff’s claim
is based, or whether the third-party’s complaint, it necessarily follows that it likewise had
claim, although arising out of another or jurisdiction over the third-party complaint which is but an
different contract or transaction, is incident thereof.
connected with the plaintiff’s claim;
(2) Whether the third-party defendant This must be so because jurisdiction over the main case
would be liable to the plaintiff or the embraces all incidental matters arising therefrom and
defendant for all or part of the plaintiff’s
connected therewith. A contrary rule would result in "split
claim against the original defendant,
although the third-party defendant’s jurisdiction" which is not favored, and in multiplicity of
liability arises out of another transaction; suits, a situation obnoxious to the orderly administration of
or justice. The court acquired jurisdiction over the third-party
(3) Whether the third-party defendant may complaint, provided it had jurisdiction over the main
assert any defense which the third-party case, for the reason that the third-party complaint is but a
plaintiff has, or may have against the continuation thereof, its purpose being to seek
plaintiff’s claim.
"contribution, indemnity, subrogation or any other relief, in 12, Rule 6) or that it be connected with plaintiff’s
respect to his opponent's claim. claim.

Pascual vs. Bautista (1970) – Dizon, J DISPOSITIVE: CA Affirmed


Third party plaintiff: Pilar Bautista
Third party defendant: Mariano R. Flores
Concept: Third-party claims C. Reply

Doctrine: For a claim to be properly raised in a pending RULE 6


action by way of third party complaint, it is not necessary Kinds of Pleadings
that it be one arising from or entirely dependent upon the
main action; it is enough that it be “in respect” of the Section 10. Reply. — A reply is a pleading, the office or
claim of third party plaintiff’s opponent (pursuant to Sec. function of which is to deny, or allege facts in denial or
12, Rule 6) or that it be connected with plaintiff’s claim. avoidance of new matters alleged by way of defense in
the answer and thereby join or make issue as to such new
FACTS: In a civil case between Pascual and Bautista et matters. If a party does not file such reply, all the new
al., Bautista filed a third-party complaint against Mariano matters alleged in the answer are deemed controverted.
R. Flores, in which the latter was declared in default. After
trial, RTC ruled in favor of plaintiff. All parties appealed - The plaintiff’s response to the defendant's
except Flores, which was affirmed by the CA and SC. A answer. The function of which is to deny or allege
writ of execution was issued, but was subsequently set facts in denial or in avoidance of new matters
aside by the RTC, upon motion by Flores, on the ground alleged by way of defense in the answer and
that more than ten years had already elapsed since the thereby join or make issue as to such new
judgment, so that no writ of execution of said judgment matters.
can now be issued pursuant to Sec. 6, Rule 39. Bautista - Effect of Failure to Reply
filed an action for the revival of the final judgment, which o General Rule - Filing a reply is merely
Flores opposed on the ground that said judgment had optional. New facts that were alleged in
already prescribed per Sec. 6, Rule 39 the answer are deemed controverted
should a party fail to reply thereto.
ISSUE: WON the judgment could be revived (NO) o Exception–When a Reply is necessary
(a) To set up affirmative defenses on the
RATIO: counterclaim [Rosario v. Martinez]
No. A judgment made in default is deemed to be (b) Where the answer alleges the
immediately final and executory. defense of usury in which case a reply
- Essential issue is which judgment, between the CFI or under oath should be made;
SC could be revived. If it is the CFI’s, then it could not otherwise, the allegation of usurious
be revived because it is now time bared; while if it interest shall be deemed admitted
was the SC decision, such action should prosper. [Rule 8, Sec. 8; Sun Bros. v. Caluntad]
- 2 undisputed facts to support non-revival: (c) Where the defense in the answer is
o Flores did not appeal the CFI decision. As based on an actionable document, a
such, it is not affected at all either by the CA reply under oath must be made;
or SC decision on appeal. otherwise, the genuineness and due
o A judgment by default by the CFI is not execution of the document shall be
appealable and deemed to be immediately deemed admitted. [Rule 8, Sec. 11;
executory under Sec. 7, Rule 35. Therefore, Toribio v. Bidin]
even if Flores had attempted to appeal, it
would have been out of order. RULE 11
- Bautista: The judgment by default may not be When to File Responsive Pleadings
considered final or enforceable until the final
determination of the main case. Section 10. Omitted counterclaim or cross-claim. — When
- SC: Argument might only apply if the cause of action a pleader fails to set up a counterclaim or a cross-claim
alleged in the third party complaint was dependent through oversight, inadvertence, or excusable neglect, or
upon the success or failure of the claim subject when justice requires, he may, by leave of court, set up
matter of the main action. the counterclaim or cross-claim by amendment before
- Such is not the case here, where the COA in the third judgment. (3, R9)
party claim is for the recovery of liquidated damages
in case the deed of sale is not executed, while the
COA in the main case is the rescission of the lease Pleadings may be amended:
and the recovery of several sums of money.
(1) By leave of court;
- It is clear that for a third-party claim to be raised in a
(2) Beforejudgment;
pending action, it is not necessary that it be one
(3) On the grounds of:
arising from or entirely dependent upon the main
a. Oversight;
action; it is enough that it be “in respect” of the claim
b. Inadvertence;
of third party plaintiff’s opponent (pursuant to Sec.
c. Excusable neglect;
d. When justice requires. (c) Against both; or
(d) So situated as to be adversely affected
by a distribution or other disposition of
D. Intervention property in the custody of the court or of
an office thereof;
RULE 19 (2) Intervention will not unduly delay or
Intervention prejudice the adjudication of rights of
original parties
Section 1. Who may intervene. — A person who has a (3) Intervenor’s rights may not be fully
legal interest in the matter in litigation, or in the success of protected in a separate proceeding
either of the parties, or an interest against both, or is so [Lorenza Ortega v. CA, 1998] 

situated as to be adversely affected by a distribution or
other disposition of property in the custody of the court or
of an officer thereof may, with leave of court, be allowed VI. Amendments and Supplements
to intervene in the action. The court shall consider
whether or not the intervention will unduly delay or
prejudice the adjudication of the rights of the original
parties, and whether or not the intervenor's rights may be RULE 10
fully protected in a separate proceeding. (2[a], [b]a, R12)
Amended and Supplemental Pleadings
Section 2. Time to intervene. — The motion to intervene
may be filed at any time before rendition of judgment by Section 1. Amendments in general. — Pleadings may be
the trial court. A copy of the pleading-in-intervention shall amended by adding or striking out an allegation or the
be attached to the motion and served on the original name of any party, or by correcting a mistake in the
parties. (n) name of a party or a mistaken or inadequate allegation
or description in any other respect, so that the actual
Section 3. Pleadings-in-intervention. — The intervenor shall merits of the controversy may speedily be determined,
file a complaint-in-intervention if he asserts a claim without regard to technicalities, and in the most
against either or all of the original parties, or an answer-in- expeditious and inexpensive manner. (1)
intervention if he unites with the defending party in
resisting a claim against the latter. (2[c]a, R12) HOW TO AMEND PLEADINGS [Rule 10,Sec. 1]

Section 4. Answer to complaint-in-intervention. — The (1) Adding an allegation of a party;


answer to the complaint-in-intervention shall be filed (2) Adding the name of a party;
within fifteen (15) days from notice of the order admitting (3) Striking out an allegation of a party;
the same, unless a different period is fixed by the court. (4) Striking out the name of a party;
(2[d]a, R12) (5) Correcting a mistake in the name of a party; and
(6) Correcting a mistaken or inadequate allegation or
- A legal remedy whereby a person is permitted to description in any other respect
become a party in a case, by either:
(1) Joining the plaintiff;
(2) Joining the defendant; A new copy of the entire pleading, incorporating the
(3) Asserting his right against both plaintiff amendments, which shall be indicated by appropriate
and defendant, considering that either: marks, shall be filed. [Rule 10, Sec. 7]
(a) He has a legal interest in the subject
Purpose: That the actual merits of the controversy may
matter of the action;
speedily be determined, without regard to technicalities,
(b) He has legal interest in the success of 

and in the most expeditious and inexpensive manner.
either of the parties
(c) He has legal interest against both of 
the
As a general policy, liberality in allowing amendments is
parties greatest in the early stages of a law suit, decreases as it
(d) He is going to be adversely affected by 
 progresses and changes at times to a strictness
the disposition of the property in the amounting to a prohibition. This is further restricted by the
custody of the court [Rule 19, Sec. 1] condition that the amendment should not prejudice the
- Intervention is never an independent action, but adverse party or place him at a disadvantage. [Barfel
is ancillary and supplemental to the existing Development v. CA, 1993]
litigation. Its purpose is to afford one not an
original party, yet having a certain right/interest
in the pending case, the opportunity to appear
and be joined so he could assert or protect such Types of Amendments:
right/interest. [Carino v. Ofilada, 1993]
- The requisites of intervention are: (1) Amendment as a matter of right
(1) Legal interest: (2) Amendment as a matter of judicial discretion
(a) In the matter in controversy; or
(b) In the success of either of the parties; or
RULE 10 Docket fee should be based on the amended pleading

Section 2. Amendments as a matter of right. — A party


may amend his pleading once as a matter of right at any
time before a responsive pleading is served or, in the RULE 10
case of a reply, at any time within ten (10) days after it is
served. (2a) Section 3. Amendments by leave of court. — Except as
provided in the next preceding section, substantial
amendments may be made only upon leave of court.
But such leave may be refused if it appears to the court
AMENDMENTS AS A MATTER OF RIGHT [Rule 10, Sec. 2] that the motion was made with intent to delay. Orders of
the court upon the matters provided in this section shall
When amendment is allowed as a matter of right: be made upon motion filed in court, and after notice to
the adverse party, and an opportunity to be heard. (3a)
(1) Once as a matter of course
(a) A 2nd or subsequent amendment must now
be with leave of court, not a matter of right
anymore AMENDMENTS BY LEAVE OF COURT
(2) Instances:
(a) Substantial amendment – before responsive [Rule 10, Sec. 3]
pleading is filed
(i) Amendment of complaint before an When leave of court is necessary before amendment is
answer is filed. allowed:
(ii) Amendment of answer before a
reply is filed or before the period for (1) All substantial amendments (unless it falls under Rule
filing a reply expires 10, Sec. 2 as a matter of right)
(iii) Amendment of reply any time (2) When a responsive pleading has already been served
within 10 days after it is served
(b) Formal amendment
Requisites:

A motion to dismiss is NOT a responsive pleading that will (1) A motion for leave of court to amend pleading is filed
prevent the amendment of a complaint as a matter of (a) Amended pleading should be attached to the
right. Hence, the original complaint may still be amended motion [see Sec. 9, Rule 15]
as a matter of right despite the filing of a motion to (2) Notice is given to the adverse party
dismiss by the defendant (Prudence Realty and Dev’t. (3) Parties are given opportunity to be heard
Corp. vs. CA) Grounds for allowance of the amendment

When amendment is matter of right, the following may be (1) If it appears to the court that the motion was made to
done: delay the action, leave of court is not given
(2) There must be some reasonable grounds justifying its
1. Substantial change in the cause of action exercise of discretion to allow amendment
2. Alter the theory of the case
3. Confer jurisdiction to the court
When amendment by leave of court may not be allowed

Where some but not all the defendants have not yet (1) If the cause of action, defense or theory of the case is
answered, plaintiffs may amend their complaint once, as changed.
a matter of right, in respect to claims asserted solely (2) If amendment is intended to confer jurisdiction to the
against the non-answering defendants, but NOT as to court.
claims asserted against the OTHER defendants (Siascoco (a) If the court has no jurisdiction in the subject
v. CA) matter of the case, the amendment of the
complaint cannot be allowed so as to confer
New summons is required to be served on the defendant jurisdiction on the court over the property. [PNB v.
with the amended complaint if new causes of action are Florendo (1992)]
alleged in such amended complaint (De Dios v. CA). (3) If amendment is for curing a premature or non-existing
However, if the defendant had already appeared in cause of action.
court in response to the first summons, so that he was (4) If amendment is for purposes of delay.
already in court when the amended complaint was filed,
then ordinary service of that pleading upon him would be
sufficient and no new summons need be served upon Court’s exercise of this discretion will not be disturbed on
him, except when additional parties are impleaded in appeal except in case of evident abuse thereof (Peneyra
which case summons should be served upon such v. IAC)
additional parties
Test of introduction of new cause of action: whether the
defendant shall be required to answer for a liability or
legal obligation wholly different from that which was thereby. The court may grant a continuance to enable
stated in the original complaint. the amendment to be made. (5a)

RULE 10 AMENDMENTS TO CONFORM TO OR AUTHORIZE


PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE [Rule 10, Sec. 5]
Section 4. Formal amendments. — A defect in the
designation of the parties and other clearly clerical or Applicability of Sec. 5 - This is an instance wherein the
typographical errors may be summarily corrected by the court acquires jurisdiction over the issues even if the same
court at any stage of the action, at its initiative or on are not alleged in the original pleadings of the parties
motion, provided no prejudice is caused thereby to the where the trial of said issues is with the express or implied
adverse party. (4a) consent of the parties

What Sec. 5 contemplates:

FORMAL AMENDMENTS (1) It allows a complaint which states no cause of action


(Rule 10, Sec. 4) to be cured either by:
When an amendment is formal: (a) Evidence presented without objection or
(1) When there is a mere defect in the designation of the (b) In the event of an objection sustained by the
parties; court, by an amendment of the complaint with
(2) Other clearly clerical or typographical errors leave of court
(2) It also allows the admission of evidence:
(a) On a defense not raised in a motion or answer if
How formal amendments are effected no objection is made thereto;
(b) In the event of such objection, court may allow
(1) It may be summarily corrected by the court at any amendment of the answer in order to raise said
stage of the action defense
(2) A party may, by motion, call for the formal
amendment
NOTE: The formal amendment must NOT cause prejudice NOTE: Remember, however, that where the plaintiff has
to the adverse party no valid cause of action at the time of the filing of the
complaint, this defect cannot be cured or remedied by
the acquisition or accrual of one while the action is
pending

Amendment pending appeal

May be permitted by court even if for the first time on


appeal in order to substitute the name of the real party in
interest provided that such an amendment should not Two Scenarios:
involve a change in the cause of action or result in undue
prejudice to the adverse party (Unda v. COMELEC) (1) When evidence is NOT objected to

- When issues not raised by pleadings are tried by


express or implied consent of the parties, they
RULE 10 shall be treated in all respected as if they had
been raised in the pleadings (complaint is
Section 5. Amendment to conform to or authorize deemed ipso facto rectified)
presentation of evidence. — When issues not raised by - Such amendments of pleadings as may be
the pleadings are tried with the express or implied necessary to cause them to conform to the
consent of the parties they shall be treated in all respects evidence and raise these issues may be made
as if they had been raised in the pleadings. Such upon motion of any party at any time, even after
amendment of the pleadings as may be necessary to judgment
cause them to conform to the evidence and to raise - But failure to amend does not affect the result of
these issues may be made upon motion of any party at the trial of those issues
any time, even after judgment; but failure to amend does (2) When evidence IS objected to:
not effect the result of the trial of these issues. If evidence
is objected to at the trial on the ground that it is not within - Objection on the ground that it is not within the
the issues made by the pleadings, the court may allow issues made by the pleadings
the pleadings to be amended and shall do so with - Court may allow the pleadings to be amended
liberality if the presentation of the merits of the action and shall do so freely when the presentation of
and the ends of substantial justice will be subserved the merits of the action will be subserved
- As safeguard, the court may grant a Supplemental
Amended Pleading
continuance to enable the objecting party to Pleading
meet such evidence
Refers to facts Refers to facts
ALREADY EXISTING at arising AFTER the
Section 6. Supplemental pleadings. — Upon motion of a FACTS the time of the filing of the original
party the court may, upon reasonable notice and upon commencement of pleading
such terms as are just, permit him to serve a supplemental the action
pleading setting forth transactions, occurrences or events
which have happened since the date of the pleading Results in the Merely an addition
sought to be supplemented. The adverse party may EFFECT TO withdrawal or the to, but does NOT
plead thereto within ten (10) days from notice of the ORIGINAL original pleading result in the
order admitting the supplemental pleading. (6a) PLEADING withdrawal of, the
original pleading

Can be made as a Can only be made


SUPPLEMENTAL PLEADINGS matter of right, as with leave of court,
when no responding upon motion of a
HOW
Definition: One which sets forth transactions, occurrences pleading has yet party
MADE
or events which have happened since the date of the been filed, or
pleading sought to be supplemented. [Rule 10, Sec. 6] discretion of the
court
Purpose: To bring into the records new facts which will
enlarge or change the kind of relief to which the plaintiff When an amended A supplemental
is entitled [Ada v. Baylon (2012), citing Young v. Spouses NEW COPY pleading is filed, a pleading does not
Yu] OF new copy of the require the filing of
PLEADING entire pleading must a new copy of the
- A supplemental complaint/pleading supplies be filed entire pleading
deficiencies in aid of an original pleading, not to
entirely substitute the latter.
- Thus, a supplemental complaint must be
consistent with and in aid of, the cause of action RULE 10
set forth in the original complaint and a new or
independent cause of action cannot be set up Section 7. Filing of amended pleadings. — When any
by such complaint (Pasay City Government v. pleading is amended, a new copy of the entire pleading,
CFI of Manila [1984]) incorporating the amendments, which shall be indicated
by appropriate marks, shall be filed. (7a)

Admission of supplemental pleading is discretionary, not How Amendments are Indicated


a matter of right.
Amendments to a pleading should be indicated in the
How Made: It is made upon motion of a party with amended pleading, as by underscoring or underlining,
reasonable notice and upon terms as are just. enclosing them in quotation marks, italization, putting
them in capital letters, or in any other manner as would
clearly exhibit such amendments.

Limitations:

(1) Claims or defenses which have matured after the How to File
filing of the original pleadings cannot be averred in a
supplemental pleading (it may be the subject of an Amended pleadings (not as a matter of right) and
amendment) Supplemental Pleadings are filed by filing a motion for
(2) Supplemental pleadings are not allowed on separate leave to file such pleading which motion shall be
and distinct causes of action accompanied by the pleading which shall be
(a) A supplemental pleading may raise a new accompanied by the pleading or motion sought to be
cause of action as long as it has some relation to admitted (Sec. 9, Rule 15)
the original cause of action set forth in the
original complaint. [Ada v. Baylon (2012)]
(3) The admission or non-admission of a supplemental
pleading is not a matter of right but is discretionary RULE 10
on the court
Section 8. Effect of amended pleadings. — An amended
pleading supersedes the pleading that it amends.
Amended vs Supplemental Pleadings However, admissions in superseded pleadings may be
received in evidence against the pleader, and claims or
defenses alleged therein not incorporated in the the RTC, with the supplemental complaint attached to it,
amended pleading shall be deemed waived. (n) which prayed for another injunction to restrain BPI from
foreclosing the third mortgage. This was granted. BPI
raised the matter to CA, which ruled in its favor, voiding
the order of the RTC judge. Hence, this petition by
EFFECT OF AMENDED PLEADING [Rule 10, Sec. 8]
Leobrera.
(1) An amended pleading supersedes the pleading that
it amends ISSUE: WON there was a grave abuse of discretion in the
(2) Admissions in the superseded pleading can still be admission of the supplemental complaint (YES)
received in evidence against the pleader
(3) Claims or defenses alleged therein but not
RATIO:
incorporated or reiterated in the amended pleading are
deemed waived The matters raised in the supplemental complaint are
entirely different and unrelated from the causes of action
raised in the original complaint, and hence, cannot be
EFFECT OF ADMISSIONS IN PLEADINGS admitted.
- A supplemental complaint should, as the name
- Admission cannot be controverted by the party
implies, supply only deficiencies in aid of an original
making making such admission and are conclusive as
complaint
to him, and that all proofs submitted by him contrary
- The matters therein must be based on matters arising
thereto or inconsistent therewith should be ignored,
subsequent to the original complaint related to the
whether objection is interposed by the party or not
claim or defense presented therein and founded on
the same cause of action.
- It cannot be used to try a new matter or new cause of
Leobrera v. CA (1989) – Cortes, J.
action.
Petitioner: Carlos Leobrera
- Since the P500k loan is a separate transaction from
Respondents: CA and BPI that of P800k line of credit, the matter in the former
Concept: Amendments and Supplements cannot be admitted in a supplemental complaint and
is the proper subject of separate complaint, even if
Doctrine: A supplemental complaint should, as the name the reliefs prayed for both causes are similar.
implies, supply only deficiencies in aid of an original
complaint. The matters therein must be based on matters DISPOSITIVE: Petition denied. Injunction lifted.
arising subsequent to the original complaint related to
Lambino v. Presiding Judge (2007) – Callejo, Sr., J.
the claim or defense presented therein and founded on
Petitioner: Sps. Orlando and Carmelita Lambino
the same cause of action. It cannot be used to try a new
Respondent: Hon. Presiding Judge, RTC Branch 172
matter or new cause of action.
Concept: Amendments and Supplements
FACTS:
Doctrine: An amended/supplementary complaint is
Carlos Leobrera was granted by BPI a P800k line of credit.
meant to supply the deficiencies in the original complaint
This was secured by two real estate mortgages and
and not to supplant it. The admission of a supplementary
evidenced by two 90-day promissory notes for P500k and
complaint is discretionary on the part of the judge,
P300k. Apart from this line of credit, Leobrera was also
considering two factors: (1) the resulting prejudice to the
granted a separate 3-year term loan for an amount of
parties, and (2) whether the movant will be prejudice if
P500k, and evidenced by a promissory note for the same
the supplemental pleading will be denied.
amount. This loan was also secured, by a real estate
mortgage. When the two 90-day notes matured, BPI and
Leobrera were unsuccessful in negotiating the terms for
their renewal. Due to a lack of agreement, BPI prepared
to foreclose the first two real estate mortgages. Before BPI
could push through with the foreclosures, Leobrera filed a FACTS:
complaint for damages with a prayer for a writ of
preliminary injunction in the RTC. The said writ was The Lambinos took out a loan with BPI Family Savings
eventually issued. Meanwhile, the Bank wrote Leobrera Bank for the amount of P600k, with an interest rate of 19%
that since he failed to pay the amortization due on the 3- per annum. It was secured by a real estate mortgage.
year term loan, BPI opted to accelerate the maturity of When the Lambinos failed to pay the monthly
the loan and make the same due and demandable. BPI amortizations, BPI moved to foreclose the mortgaged
also threatened to foreclose the mortgage securing the property. However, a complaint for the annulment of the
said loan. Before BPI could make good on the threat, loan and the foreclosure of the mortgage was filed by
Leobrera filed a Motion to File Supplemental Complaint in the Lambinos in the RTC. While the case was pending, the
Lambinos offered to settle their account. This was, DISPOSITIVE: Petition dismissed. CA affirmed.
however, rejected by BPI. The RTC suspended the pre-trial
proceedings to allow the parties to amicably settle the
case. They were unable to come to unagreement,
however, and so the proceedings resumed in September
1998. On July 2000, the Lambinos filed a supplemental
complaint where they alleged that the bank imposed
arbitrary rates of interests and damages, claiming that
they were only informed of them now. However, the RTC
did not admit the supplementary pleadings, as the rates
of interests allegedly arbitrarily set have already been
accruing since the release of the loan, and hence are
not proper matter for supplementary complaints and
should have been alleged in the original complaint.
When raised to the CA, the CA affirmed the ruling of the
RTC. Hence this petition.

ISSUE: WON the supplementary complaint should be


admitted (NO)

RATIO:

The matter in the supplementary complaint should have


been included in the original complaint and is improperly
submitted in a supplementary pleading.

- The SC upheld the factual findings of the RTC and


held that these rates of interests and damages added
by BPI were already accruing when the proceeds of
the loan were released. Hence, the Lambinos were
already aware of these facts before they filed the
original complaint.
- According to Sec. 6, Rule 10 of the Rules of Court, the
proper subject of a supplementary complaint is only
those transactions, occurrences, or events, which
accrued after the date of the complaint.
- The purpose of the rule is that the entire controversy
might be settled in one action; to avoid unnecessary
litigation; prevent delay, unnecessary repetition of
effort; unwarranted expense of litigants; to broaden
the scope of the issues in an action owing to the light
thrown on it by facts, events and occurrences which
have accrued after the filing of the original pleading;
to bring into record the facts enlarging or charging
the kind of relief to which plaintiff is entitled.
- Also, the admission or non-admission of a
supplemental pleading is discretionary on the part of
the court, depending on two factors: (1) the resulting
prejudice to the parties, and (2) whether the movant
will be prejudice if the supplemental pleading will be
denied.
- The Lambinos should have sought to nullify these rates
of interests and damages along in the original
complaint and not in a supplemental pleading. They
did not and are now thus proscribed from
incorporating them in a belated supplementary
complaint.
VII. Filing (a) ordered by the court (Sec. 2, Rule 14); or
A. Modes of filing (b) when such service was made before the entry o
appearance in writing by an attorney; or
(c) when he appears before the court without a
RULE 13 counsel; or
(d) when the rule requires service upon the party
Filing and Service of Pleadings, Judgments and Other himself
Papers

Section 2. Filing and service, defined. — Filing is the act of A notice sent to the wrong address is not and cannot be
presenting the pleading or other paper to the clerk of a notice within the contemplation of the rules.
court.

Service is the act of providing a party with a copy of the


pleading or paper concerned. If any party has appeared RULE 13
by counsel, service upon him shall be made upon his
counsel or one of them, unless service upon the party Section 3. Manner of filing. — The filing of pleadings,
himself is ordered by the court. Where one counsel appearances, motions, notices, orders, judgments and all
appears for several parties, he shall only be entitled to other papers shall be made by presenting the original
one copy of any paper served upon him by the opposite copies thereof, plainly indicated as such, personally to
side. (2a) the clerk of court or by sending them by registered mail.
In the first case, the clerk of court shall endorse on the
pleading the date and hour of filing. In the second case,
the date of the mailing of motions, pleadings, or any
FILING VERSUS SERVICE OF PLEADINGS other papers or payments or deposits, as shown by the
post office stamp on the envelope or the registry receipt,
- Filing - The act of presenting the pleading or other shall be considered as the date of their filing, payment, or
paper to the clerk of court. [Rule 13, Sec. 2] deposit in court. The envelope shall be attached to the
- Service - The act of providing a party or his counsel record of the case. (1a)
with a copy of the pleading or paper concerned.
[Rule 13, Sec. 2]

MANNER OF FILING
Service to the lawyer binds the party. But service to the
party does not bind the lawyer, unless ordered by the (1) Personally
court in the following circumstances: (a) By personally presenting the original to the clerk
of court.
(1) When it is doubtful who the attorney for such (b) The pleading is deemed filed upon the receipt
party is; or of the same by the clerk of court who shall
(2) When the lawyer cannot be located; or endorse on it the date and hour of filing.
(3) When the party is directed to do something (c) If a party avails of a private carrier, the date of
personally, as when he is ordered to show cause. the court’s actual receipt of the pleading (not
[Retoni, Jr. v. CA] the date of delivery to the private carrier) is
deemed to be the date of the filing of that
Notice to the lawyer who appears to have been pleading. [Benguet Electric Cooperative v.
unconscionably irresponsible cannot be considered as NLRC (1992)]
notice to his client, as it would then be easy for the lawyer (2) By Registered Mail
to prejudice the interests of his client by just alleging that (a) Filing by mail should be through the registry
he just forgot every process of the court affecting his service (i.e. by depositing the pleading in the
clients, because he was so busy. [Bayog v. Natino] post office).
(b) The pleading is deemed filed on the date it was
deposited with the post office.
If counsel moved to another address without informing
the court of his change of address, the omission or Filing a pleading by facsimile is not sanctioned. But fax
neglect will not stay the finality of the decision. The fact was allowed in an extradition case [Justice Cuevas v.
that the counsel used a different address in the later Juan Antonio Munoz]
pleadings should not be taken as notice to the court of
either a change of address or of another address in
addition to that which was already of record.

Procedure in filing and service

When Notice to Party is Proper


- A copy of the pleading is first or simultaneously General rule: Personal filing and service is preferred. [Rule
furnished the opposing party. Proof of such is 13, Sec. 11]
indicated on the original of the pleading file din
court, such indication being either a handwritten Resort to other modes of filing and service must be
acknowledgment by the adverse party or registry accompanied by an explanation why the service/filing
receipt was not done personally. If there is no written
- Service precedes filing explanation, the paper is considered not filed.
- If pleading is filed in court without a copy thereof
previously or simultaneously served upon the Exception: Papers emanating from the court.
opposing party  clerk of court should NOT receive it
for filing.

RULE 13
Transmission through a private carrier or letter-forwarder
instead of the Philippine Post Office is NOT a recognized Section 12. Proof of filing. — The filing of a pleading or
mode of filing pleadings. The date of delivery of paper shall be proved by its existence in the record of the
pleadings to a private letter-forwarding agency is not to case. If it is not in the record, but is claimed to have been
be considered as the date of filing thereof in court, and filed personally, the filing shall be proved by the written or
that in such cases, the date of actual receipt by the stamped acknowledgment of its filing by the clerk of
court, and not the date of delivery to private carrier, is court on a copy of the same; if filed by registered mail, by
deemed the date of filing of that pleading (Industrial the registry receipt and by the affidavit of the person who
Timber Corp. vs. NLRC [1994]) did the mailing, containing a full statement of the date
and place of depositing the mail in the post office in a
sealed envelope addressed to the court, with postage
RULE 13 fully prepaid, and with instructions to the postmaster to
return the mail to the sender after ten (10) days if not
Section 4. Papers required to be filed and served. — Every delivered. (n
judgment, resolution, order, pleading subsequent to the
complaint, written motion, notice, appearance,
demand, offer of judgment or similar papers shall be filed
with the court, and served upon the parties affected.
(2a)

Papers required to be filed and served:

(1) Pleading subsequent to the complaint;


(2) Appearance;
(3) Written Motion;
(4) Notice;
(5) Order;
(6) Judgment;
(7) Demand;
(8) Offer of Judgment;
(9) Resolution;
(10) Similar papers.

RULE 13

Section 11. Priorities in modes of service and filing. —


Whenever practicable, the service and filing of pleadings
and other papers shall be done personally. Except with
respect to papers emanating from the court, a resort to
other modes must be accompanied by a written
explanation why the service or filing was not done
personally. A violation of this Rule may be cause to
consider the paper as not filed. (n)

PRIORITIES IN MODES OF SERVICE AND FILING


(1) Ordinary Mail - it does not constitute filing until the
papers are actually delivered into the custody of
B. Modes of service clerk or judge
(a) Service may be done by ordinary mail if no
registry service is available in the locality of
RULE 13 either sender or addressee
(2) Registered Mail - The date of mailing is the date of
Section 5. Modes of service. — Service of pleadings filing
motions, notices, orders, judgments and other papers (a) Date of filing is determinable from 2 sources
shall be made either personally or by mail. (3a) (whichever will suffice to prove the timeliness
of the filing of the pleadings):
(i) From the post office stamp on the
envelope or
1. Personal (ii) From the registry receipt
(b) It is done by depositing in the post office:
(i) In a sealed envelope
RULE 13 (ii) Plainly addressed to the party or his
counsel
Section 6. Personal service. — Service of the papers may (a) At his office if known
be made by delivering personally a copy to the party or (b) Otherwise, at his residence if known
his counsel, or by leaving it in his office with his clerk or (iii) Postage fully pre-paid
with a person having charge thereof. If no person is found (iv) With instructions to the postmaster to return
in his office, or his office is not known, or he has no office, the mail to the sender after 10 days if
then by leaving the copy, between the hours of eight in undelivered
the morning and six in the evening, at the party's or
counsel's residence, if known, with a person of sufficient
age and discretion then residing therein. (4a) 3. Substituted

RULE 13

Personal Service [Rule 13, Sec. 6] Section 8. Substituted service. — If service of pleadings,
motions, notices, resolutions, orders and other papers
(1) Delivering personally a copy to the party, who is not cannot be made under the two preceding sections, the
represented by a counsel, or to his counsel; or office and place of residence of the party or his counsel
being unknown, service may be made by delivering the
(2) Leaving a copy in counsel’s office with his clerk or with copy to the clerk of court, with proof of failure of both
a person having charge thereof; or personal service and service by mail. The service is
complete at the time of such delivery. (6a)
(3) Leaving the copy between 8am and 6pm at the
party’s or counsel’s residence, if known, with a person of
sufficient age and discretion then residing thereon – if not
person is found in his office, or if his office is unknown, or if Substituted Service [Rule 13, Sec. 8]
he has no office
(1) Done by delivery of the copy to the clerk of court
with proof of failure of both personal and service by
mail
2. Mail (2) Requisites. Proper only when:
(a) Service cannot be made personally or by mail
(b) Office and place of residence of the party of his
RULE 13 counsel being unknown
(c) There is proof of affidavit when failure of both
Section 7. Service by mail. — Service by registered mail personal service or by registered mail; and
shall be made by depositing the copy in the post office in (d) That there is delivery of the pleading, motion or
a sealed envelope, plainly addressed to the party or his other papers to the clerk of court
counsel at his office, if known, otherwise at his residence, (3) Service is complete at the time of such delivery
if known, with postage fully prepaid, and with instructions
to the postmaster to return the mail to the sender after
ten (10) days if undelivered. If no registry service is 4. Publication
available in the locality of either the senders or the
addressee, service may be done by ordinary mail. (5a;
Bar Matter No. 803, 17 February 1998) RULE 13

Section 9. Service of judgments, final orders, or resolutions.


— Judgments, final orders or resolutions shall be served
Service by Mail [Rule 13, Sec. 7] either personally or by registered mail. When a party
summoned by publication has failed to appear in the mailing of facts showing compliance with section 7 of this
action, judgments, final orders or resolutions against him Rule. If service is made by registered mail, proof shall be
shall be served upon him also by publication at the made by such affidavit and the registry receipt issued by
expense of the prevailing party. (7a) the mailing office. The registry return card shall be filed
immediately upon its receipt by the sender, or in lieu
thereof the unclaimed letter together with the certified or
sworn copy of the notice given by the postmaster to the
SERVICE OF JUDGMENTS, FINAL ORDERS, OR RESOLUTIONS addressee. (10a)
[Rule 13, Sec. 9]

Service is done either:


PROOF OF FILING
(1) Personally
(2) By registered mail (1) Filing is proved by its existence in the record of the
(3) By publication ONLY IF: case [Rule 13, Sec. 12]
(a) Party is summoned by publication AND
(b) He failed to appear in the action; or (2) If it is not in the record:
(c) When such party was served with
summons other than by publication and (a) Personally:
subsequently absconds and his present i. Deemed filed: Upon receipt of pleading by the
address is unknown; but in this case, such Clerk of Court
service should be ordered by the court. ii. Proof: Written or stamped acknowledgment of its
[Feria] filing by the clerk of court on a copy of the
NOTE: There is NO substituted service of judgments and same;
final orders (b) If filed by registered mail:
i. Deemed filed: On the date the pleading was
Order in Open Court deposited with the post office
ii. Proof: by the registry receipt and by the affidavit
Shall be presumed received by the parties on the very of the person who did the mailing, containing a
date and time of promulgation and amounts to a legal full statement of
notification for all legal purposes. 1. the date and place of depositing the mail
in the post office in a sealed envelope
addressed to the court,
2. with postage fully prepaid, and
RULE 13 3. with instructions to the postmaster to return
the mail to the sender after ten (10) days if
Section 10. Completeness of service. — Personal service is not delivered.
complete upon actual delivery. Service by ordinary mail
is complete upon the expiration of ten (10) days after PROOF OF SERVICE
mailing, unless the court otherwise provides. Service by
registered mail is complete upon actual receipt by the Mode Proof of service
addressee, or after five (5) days from the date he
received the first notice of the postmaster, whichever Personal Service A written admission of the party
date is earlier. (8a) served, OR

The official return of the server; OR

Purpose of the rule on completeness of service for service Affidavit of the party serving
by registered mail: containing a full statement of the
date, place, and manner of service
To make sure that the party being served with the
pleading, order or judgment is duly informed of the same Service by Affidavit of the person mailing
so that such party can take steps to protect the interests, ordinary mail stating the facts showing
i.e., enable to file an appeal or apply for other compliance with Rule 13, Sec. 7
appropriate reliefs before the decision becomes final.
[MINTERBRO v,CA (2012)] Service by Affidavit of person mailing
registered mail containing facts showing
compliance with Rule 13, Sec. 7,
AND
Section 13. Proof of Service. — Proof of personal service
shall consist of a written admission of the party served, or Registry receipt issued by mailing
the official return of the server, or the affidavit of the party office; OR
serving, containing a full statement of the date, place
and manner of service. If the service is by ordinary mail,
proof thereof shall consist of an affidavit of the person
The registry return card which shall Completeness of Proof of Service (sec. 13)
be filed immediately upon its Service (sec. 10)
receipt by the sender, or in lieu
thereof of the unclaimed letter Personal Service
together with the certified or sworn
copy of the notice given by the Upon actual delivery Written admission of the party
postmaster to the addressee. served, OR

Official return of the server OR

Lack of Proof of Service Affidavit of the party serving,


with a full statement of the
Effect: No proof of service of notice to the other party  date/place/manner of service
motion is not entitled to judicial cognizance. Such motion
is nothing but a scrap of paper Service by Ordinary Mail

10 days after mailing, Affidavit of the person mailing


unless otherwise of facts showing compliance
provided by Court with Sec. 7 Rule 13

Service by Registered Mail

Whichever is earlier: Affidavit of the person mailing


of facts showing compliance
-Actual receipt by the with Sec. 7 Rule 13
addressee

AND
OR

Registry receipt issued by the


-5 days after the post office
addressee received 1st
postmaster’s notice
(constructive)

Substituted Service

At the time of delivery of the copy to the clerk of court


together with proof of failure of both personal service
and service by mail

Solar v. Ricafort (1998) – Davide, Jr., J

Petitioner: Solar Team Entertainment


Respondents: Hon. Helen Bautista Ricafort (Presiding
Judge of RTC Parañaque), Team Image Entertainment,
Felix Co, Jeffrey Cal, and King Cuisia
Concept: Filing: Modes of service
Nature of Action: Special civil action - certiorari

Doctrine:

FACTS: Solar filed a complaint for the recovery of


possession and damages with prayer for writ of replevin
against Team Image, Co, Cal & Cuisia. After asking for an
extension (granted) to file an answer, Team Image et. al
filed their answer, furnishing counsel for Solar a copy by o Court considers: importance of the subject
registered mail without any written explanation as to why matter of the case or the issues involved therein,
service was not made personally. Solar filed a motion to the prima facie merit of the pleading
- SC: Proximity between the offices of opposing
expunge the answer and to declare Team Image et. al in
counsel was established, and the distance
default for not complying with Sec. 11, Rule 13. Team separating the offices of opposing counsel and the
Image argued that rigid and inflexible compliance with post office was “ten times farther” from the offices
the rule is contrary to Sec. 6, Rule 3, which promotes separating opposing counsel
liberal construction of the Rules. Judge Ricafort issued an - SC: In view of the proximity between the offices of
order, saying it is within the discretion of the TC whether to opposing counsel and the absence of any attendant
consider the pleading as filed or not, and denied the explanation as to why personal service was not
effected, Team Image et. al’s counsel violated Sec.
motion to expunge.
11, Rule 13, and the motion to expunge was
meritorious, HOWEVER, the grant or denial remained
ISSUES:
with the TC’s discretion (Sec. 6, Rule 1)
1. WON the failure to provide a written explanation
2. Judge Ricafort correctly denied the motion expunge.
(why service was not done personally) is considered
- To resolve motions to expunge or to strike out
non-compliance with Sec. 11, Rule 13 (YES)
pleadings for violation of Sec. 11, Rule 13 according
2. WON Judge Ricafort should have granted the motion
to Sec. 6, Rule 1 would render Sec. 11, Rule 13
to expunge the answer (NO)
meaningless and its sound purpose negated
- 1997 Rules took effect July 1, 1997 while the
questioned Answer filed only Aug. 8, 1997  Team
RATIO:
Image et. al’s counsel may not have been fully
aware of the requirements and ramifications of Sec.
1. Failure to provide a written explanation as to why
11, Rule 13
personal service was not complied with is a violation
o In another case where said counsel was likewise
of Sec. 11, Rule 13.
opposing counsel, he similarly failed to comply
- Sec. 5, Rule 13 prescribes 2 modes of service of
with Sec. 11
pleadings, motions, notices, orders, judgments and
- It has been several months since the Rules took effect
other papers:
 can condone
(1) Personal service (Sec. 6);
- Court is guided in the exercise of discretion, by the
(2) Service by mail (Sec. 7);
primary objective of Sec. 11, the importance of the
(3) Substituted service, only if it cannot be done
subject matter of the case, the issues involved, and
personally or by mail (Sec. 8)
the prima facie merit of the challenged pleading
- Sec. 11, Rule 13: service and filing of pleadings and
- SC: Strictest compliance with Sec. 11, Rule 13 is
other papers must, whenever practicable, be done
mandated 1 month from the promulgation of this
personally; and if made through other modes, the
Decision
party concerned must provide a written explanation
as to why the service or filing was not done personally
o Sec. 11 refers to both service of pleadings and
DISPOSITIVE: Petition DISMISSED. Violation may be
other papers on the adverse party or his counsel
(Sec. 6-8) and to the filing of pleadings and other condoned.
papers in court
- Personal service and filing are preferred because
they should expedite action or resolution and
minimize delays likely to be incurred if done by mail SEPARATE OPINION: Bellosillo, J.
o It also does away with the practice of some
lawyers who resort to less than ethical practices: - The trial court took too lightly Sec. 11, Rule 13
 By mail to catch opposing counsel off-guard, o Difficult to agree with respondent Judge that
leaving the latter with little to no time to under the provision is solely within the discretion
prepare of the trial court whether to consider the
 Upon receiving notice that it can be pleading as filed or not
claimed, unduly procrastinating before o Sec. 11 requires that service and filings shall be
claiming the parcel or not claiming it at all done personally, whenever practicable
- Sec. 11 gives the court the discretion to consider a o When not done personally, party who fails to
pleading or filing as not filed if the other modes of comply must explain why
service or filing were resorted to and no written - In case personal service and filing are neither
explanation was made as to why personal service practical nor feasible then—and only then—can the
was not done in the first place parties avail of other modes of service and filing .eg.,
o Exercise of discretion must consider the by registered mail
practicability of personal service o Resort to other modes must be accompanied by
- GR: Personal service and filing a written explanation why service and filing are
- XPN: Resort to other modes of service or filing (must not done personally
be accompanied with a written explanation)
o From that explanation, the judge will then Jurisdiction Venue
determine whether personal service and filing
are indeed impractical so that resort to other Authority of a court to hear, Place where action must
modes may be made try and decide a case be instituted
o It is only at this stage that the judge may properly
exercise his discretion—and only upon the Matter of substantive law Procedural or adjective
explanation given
law
- Judge Ricafort was without any hypothesis on which
to anchor her finding and conclusion that personal
service was not practicable because there was no Conferred by law or the May be conferred by the
explanation why registered mail was resorted to constitution; cannot be act or agreement of the
o Court’s discretion can only be exercised soundly conferred by the consent parties
if there exists some factual basis for it of the parties or by their
o Without any explanation, the judge cannot wield failure to object to the lack
any discretion
of it
- Where no explanation is offered to justify resort to
service of pleading by mail or other modes of service
Creates a relation between Creates a relation
(and filing for that matter), in lieu of the preferred
service, hence, no factual milieu is provided upon the court and the subject between the parties to the
which judicial discretion may be brought into play matter action
o The discretionary power of the court to expunge
the pleading becomes mandatory
- Sec. 11 provides for priorities, by which is meant an
order of preference in the service thereof, such that Venue of real actions
the first alternative must be availed of, and only upon
its non-availability may the second and succeeding  Real actions shall be commenced and tried in
options be resorted to the proper court which has jurisdiction over the
- Personal service and filing are preferred to fasttrack area wherein the real property involved, or a
the decongestion of court dockets ; 1997 Rules are portion thereof, is situated.
required to be construed to promote its objective of
securing a just, expeditious and inexpensive
disposition of every action and proceeding Venue of personal actions
- Deviation in this case was not merely formal; it
involves non-compliance with the mandatory  Personal actions may be commenced and tried
requirement of Sec. 11, Rule 13 in the proper court of the place where the
o Would have been more appropriate to grant the plaintiff or any of the principal plaintiffs resides, or
motion to expunge for obvious non-compliance, where the defendant or any of the principal
then on motion for reconsideration explaining the defendants resides, or in the case of a non-
non-observance, grant reconsideration in the resident defendant where he may be found, at
exercise of the court’s discretion  message the election of the plaintiff.
would have been clear that the rule should first  resides: place of abode, whether permanent or
and foremost be obeyed before the same may temporary, of the plaintiff or defendant (as
be relaxed upon exercise of discretion based on distinguished from domicile)
a reasonable explanation  No particular length of time of residence is
required.
 For a corporation, the place where its principal
VIII. Service of Summons office is located as stated in the articles of
incorporation.
RULE 16.

Sec. 1(c). Grounds. – Within the time for but before filing
the answer to the complaint or pleading asserting a
RULE 14.
claim, a motion to dismiss may be made on any of the
following grounds: x x x Sec. 1. Clerk to issue summons. – Upon the filing of the
complaint and the payment of the requisite legal fees,
That venue is improperly laid;
the clerk of court shall forthwith issue the corresponding
summons to the defendants.
xxx

Distinction between venue and jurisdiction


 Modes of service of summons are strictly followed
in order that the court may acquire jurisdiction
over the person of a defendant
 It is only when a defendant cannot be served in
person with summons within a reasonable time
Purpose of service of summons that a substituted service may be availed of.
 Residence: place where the person named in
 To give notice to the defendant or respondent the summons is living at the time when the
that an action has been commenced against service is made.
him  Within a reasonable time: period of time longer
 Summons: writ by which the defendant is notified than that demarcated by “prompt” and
of the action brought against him presupposes an attempt at a prior personal
service.
 Impossibility of personal service is a condition
Modes of service precedent for resorting to substituted service.

1 By service in person (Sec. 6, Rule 14)


2 By substituted service (Sec. 7, Rule 14) Sps Miranda v CA (2000) – Corona, J.
3 By publication (Sec. 14, Rule 14)
4 By extraterritorial service (Secs. 15, 16, Rule 14) Petitioner: Sps. Isagani Miranda and Miguela Joguilon
Respondent: CA, Lucila L. vda. de Java and Jaime Java
Concept: Substituted service
A. Modes of Service

1. Personal Doctrine: It is only when a defendant cannot be served


personally “within a reasonable time” that substituted
RULE 14. service may be made. Impossibility of prompt, personal
service should be shown by stating in the proof of service
Sec. 6. Service in person on defendant. – Whenever that efforts were made to find the defendant personally
practicable, the summons shall be served by handing a and that said efforts failed. Failure to strictly comply with
copy thereof to the defendant in person, or, if he refuses the requirements of substituted service renders said
to receive and sign for it, by tendering it to him. (7a) service ineffective.

In actions in personam FACTS: Luneta Motor Company (LMC) filed suit against
the spouses Lucila and Pablo D. Java, et al., with the
 Service in person of summons or substituted former CFI of Manila to recover one “Thames” jeep. LMC,
service within the forum is essential to the then, moved to declare the Java spouses in default for
acquisition of jurisdiction over the person of the failure to file their answer within the reglementary period,
defendant who does not voluntarily submit
notwithstanding notice. The TC granted the motion and
himself to the authority of the court
 Summons by publication will not confer upon the rendered judgment in favor of LMC. Pursuant to the writ
court jurisdiction over said defendant except of execution, the City Sheriff sold the vehicle at a public
when defendant is designated as unknown, or auction to Jose Angulo, and a parcel of land to LMC.
the like, whose whereabouts are unknown and LMC, then, sold the lot to the Sps. Miranda. Lucila vda. de
cannot be ascertained by diligent inquiry. Java and her daughter, Estela Java, filed a civil case to
nullify the CFI’s judgment as well as the execution sales
and subsequent transfers. Lucila vda. de Java died and
2. Substituted
was substituted by her heirs. The TC, then, dismissed the
RULE 14. said case for lack of jurisdiction. The CA subsequently
reversed the TC. The CA held the judgment rendered in
Sec. 7. Substituted service. – If, for justifiable causes, the the first civil case as null and void, and alleged that the
defendant cannot be served within a reasonable time as TC never acquired jurisdiction over Lucila L. Java and her
provided in the preceding section, service may be husband since there was no proper service of summons.
effected (a) by leaving copies of the summons at the Thus, it ordered the Sps. Miranda to execute a deed of
defendant’s residence with some person of suitable age reconveyance over the lot in favor the spouses Java.
and discretion then residing therein, or (b) by leaving the
copies at defendant’s office or regular place of business
with some competent person in charge thereof. (8a)
ISSUE: WON the service of summons served on the
spouses Java by the Sheriff was invalid, thus, the lower
court never acquired jurisdiction
Substituted service
deceased Archimedes Trajano committed by
military intelligence officials of the Philippines
RATIO: allegedly under the command, direction,
authority, supervision, tolerance, sufferance
YES. The service of summons was invalid, this the lower
and/or influence of defendant Manotoc.
court never acquired jurisdiction over the spouses Java.
2. The trial court issued a Summons addressed to
- In declaring the first civil case null and void, the petitioner at Alexandra Condominium
CA found from the Sheriff’s Return of Service that Corporation or Alexandra Homes, E2 Room 104,
summons was served on the spouses Java by at No. 29 Meralco Avenue, Pasig City. The
substituted service without effort at personal Summons and a copy of the Complaint were
service.
allegedly served upon (Mr.) Macky de la Cruz, an
- Service of summons upon the defendant is
essential for the court to acquire jurisdiction over alleged caretaker of Manotoc at the
his person. The modes of service should be strictly condominium unit mentioned. When Manotoc
followed in order that the court may acquire failed to file her Answer, the trial court declared
jurisdiction. Thus, it is only when a defendant her in default.
cannot be served personally “within a
3. Manotoc, by special appearance of counsel,
reasonable time” that substituted service may be
made. filed a Motion to Dismiss on the ground of lack of
- In the instant case, the Sheriff was not able to jurisdiction over her person due to an invalid
show reason why personal service could not be substituted service of summons. The grounds to
made. Impossibility of prompt, personal service support the motion were: (1) the address of
should be shown by stating in the proof of service defendant indicated in the Complaint
that efforts were made to find the defendant
(Alexandra Homes) was not her dwelling,
personally and that said efforts failed. Here, no
such explanation was made by the Sheriff in the residence, or regular place of business as
Return of Service. Failure to strictly comply with provided in Section 8, Rule 14 of the Rules of
the requirements of substituted service renders Court; (2) the party (de la Cruz), who was found
said service ineffective. in the unit, was neither a representative,
- For want of proper service of summons upon employee, nor a resident of the place; (3) the
defendants, the TC never acquired jurisdiction in procedure prescribed by the Rules on personal
the first civil case. Thus, the execution sales are
and substituted service of summons was ignored;
void ab initio.
(4) defendant was a resident of Singapore; and
(5) whatever judgment rendered in this case
DISPOSITIVE: Petition is DENIED, and the assailed CA would be ineffective and futile.
decision is AFFIRMED.  Manotoc presented Carlos Gonzales,
who testified that he saw Manotoc as a
visitor in Alexandra Homes only two times.
He also identified the Certification of
Manotoc v. CA (2006) – Velasco, J.
Renato A. de Leon (Assistant Property
Petitioner: Ma. Imelda M. Manotoc
Administrator of the condominium),
Respondents: Court of Appeals; Agapita Trajano on which stated that Unit E-2104 was owned
behalf of the estate of Archimedes Trajano,. by Queens Park Realty, Inc.; and at the
Concept: Requirements for valid substituted service of time the Certification was issued, the unit
summons. was not being leased by anyone.
Manotoc also presented her Philippine
Doctrine: Substituted service of summons is extraordinary
passport and the
in character and in derogation of the usual method of
Disembarkation/Embarkation Card issued
service. Hence, it must faithfully and strictly comply with
by the Immigration Service of Singapore
the prescribed requirements and circumstances
to show that she was a resident of
authorized by the rules.
Singapore. She claimed that the person
FACTS: referred to in plaintiff’s Exhibits "A" to
1. Trajano filed a case against Imee Marcos- "EEEE" as "Mrs. Manotoc" may not even
Manotoc for Filing, Recognition and/or be her, but the mother of Tommy
Enforcement of Foreign Judgment, under R39, Manotoc, and granting that she was the
Execution of Judgement. Trajano seeks the one referred to in said exhibits, only 27
enforcement of a judgment rendered by the US out of 109 entries referred to Mrs.
District Court of Honolulu, for wrongful death of Manotoc. Hence, the infrequent number
of times she allegedly entered Alexandra
Homes did not at all establish the position authorized by the rules. Indeed, "compliance
that she was a resident of said place. with the rules regarding the service of summons is
 Trajano presented Robert Swift, lead as much important as the issue of due process as
counsel for plaintiffs in the Estate of of jurisdiction."
Ferdinand Marcos Human Rights 2. The SC broke down R14.8 (old Rules; now R14.7)
Litigation, who testified that he into the ff requirements to effect a valid
participated in the deposition taking of substituted service:
Ferdinand R. Marcos, Jr.; and he (1) Impossibility of Prompt Personal Service
confirmed that Mr. Marcos, Jr. testified
 "Reasonable time" is defined as "so much
that Manotoc's residence was at the
time as is necessary under the
Alexandra Apartment, Greenhills. In
circumstances for a reasonably prudent
addition, the entries in the logbook of
and diligent man to do, conveniently,
Alexandra Homes from August 4, 1992 to
what the contract or duty requires that
August 2, 1993, listing the name of
should be done, having a regard for the
Manotoc and the Sheriff’s Return, were
rights and possibility of loss, if any, to the
adduced in evidence.
other party."
4. RTC denied the Motion to Dismiss based on the
 Under the Rules, the service of summons
documentary evidence of Trajano. It relied on
has no set period. However, when the
the presumption that the sheriff’s substituted
court, clerk of court, or the plaintiff asks
service was made in the regular performance of
the sheriff to make the return of the
official duty, and such presumption stood in the
summons and the latter submits the
absence of proof to the contrary. MR was
return of summons, then the validity of
denied.
the summons lapses. The plaintiff may
5. Manotoc filed a Petition for Certiorari and then ask for an alias summons if the
Prohibition before the CA. CA affirmed the RTC, service of summons has failed.
relying on the testimony of Robert Swift and the
 What then is a reasonable time for the
Returns of the registered mails sent to Manotoc.
sheriff to effect a personal service in
The Disembarkation/Embarkation Card and the
order to demonstrate impossibility? To the
Certification by Renato A. De Leon were hearsay,
plaintiff, "reasonable time" means no
and that said Certification did not refer to July
more than seven (7) days since an
1993—the month when the substituted service
expeditious processing of a complaint is
was effected. CA also rejected Manotoc's
what a plaintiff wants. To the sheriff,
Philippine passport as proof of her residency in
"reasonable time" means 15 to 30 days
Singapore as it merely showed the dates of her
because at the end of the month, it is a
departure from and arrival in the Philippines
practice for the branch clerk of court to
without presenting the boilerplate’s last two (2)
require the sheriff to submit a return of
inside pages where residence was indicated. The
the summons assigned to the sheriff for
CA considered the withholding of those pages as
service. The Sheriff’s Return provides data
suppression of evidence. Thus, according to the
to the Clerk of Court, which the clerk uses
CA, the trial court had acquired jurisdiction over
in the Monthly Report of Cases to be
Manotoc as there was a valid substituted service.
submitted to the Office of the Court
MR was denied. Manotoc went to the SC on R45.
Administrator within the first ten (10) days
of the succeeding month. Thus, one
ISSUE: Whether substituted service was properly done. month from the issuance of summons
(NO) can be considered "reasonable time"
with regard to personal service on the
defendant.
RATIO: No. The Sheriff's Ruturn was unable to allege the
extraordinary circumstances necessary before resort  For substituted service of summons to be
could be made to substituted service. available, there must be several
attempts by the sheriff to personally serve
1. While substituted service of summons is
the summons within a reasonable period
permitted, "it is extraordinary in character and in
of one month which eventually resulted
derogation of the usual method of service."
in failure to prove impossibility of prompt
Hence, it must faithfully and strictly comply with
service. "Several attempts" means at least
the prescribed requirements and circumstances
three (3) tries, preferably on at least two
different dates. In addition, the sheriff "relation of confidence" to the
must cite why such efforts were defendant, ensuring that the latter would
unsuccessful. It is only then that receive or at least be notified of the
impossibility of service can be confirmed receipt of the summons. These must be
or accepted. clearly and specifically described in the
(2) Specific Details in the Return Return.

 The sheriff must describe in the Return of (4) A Competent Person in Charge
Summons the facts and circumstances  If the substituted service will be done at a
surrounding the attempted personal defendant’s office or regular place of
service. The efforts made to find the business, then it should be served on a
defendant and the reasons behind the competent person in charge of the
failure must be clearly narrated in detail place or managing the office or business
in the Return. The date and time of the of defendant, such as the president or
attempts on personal service, the manager; and such individual must have
inquiries made to locate the defendant, sufficient knowledge to understand the
the name/s of the occupants of the obligation of the defendant in the
alleged residence or house of defendant summons, its importance, and the
and all other acts done, though futile, to prejudicial effects arising from inaction
serve the summons on defendant must on the summons. Again, these must be
be specified. contained in the Return.
 The form on Sheriff’s Return of Summons 3. Examining the Sheriff’s Return, there is an
on Substituted Service prescribed in the apparent absence of material data on the
Handbook for Sheriffs published by the serious efforts to serve the Summons on Manotoc
Philippine Judicial Academy requires a in person. There is no clear valid reason cited in
narration of the efforts made to find the the Return why those efforts proved inadequate,
defendant personally and the fact of to reach the conclusion that personal service has
failure. SC Administrative Circular No. 5 become impossible or unattainable outside the
dated November 9, 1989 requires that generally couched phrases of "on many
"impossibility of prompt service should be occasions several attempts were made to serve
shown by stating the efforts made to find the summons x x x personally," "at reasonable
the defendant personally and the failure hours during the day," and "to no avail for the
of such efforts," which should be made in reason that the said defendant is usually out of
the proof of service. her place and/or residence or premises." It
(3) A Person of Suitable Age and Discretion cannot be determined how many times, on what
specific dates, and at what hours of the day the
 If the substituted service will be effected
attempts were made.
at a defendant’s house or residence, it
should be left with a person of "suitable  Besides, apart from the allegation of
age and discretion then residing therein." Manotocr’s address in the Complaint, it
This is one who has attained the age of has not been shown that Trajano or
full legal capacity (18 years old) and is Sheriff Cañelas exerted extraordinary
considered to have enough discernment efforts to locate her. Certainly, the
to understand the importance of a second paragraph of the Complaint only
summons. "Discretion" is defined as "the states that respondents were "informed,
ability to make decisions which represent and so [they] allege" about the address
a responsible choice and for which an and whereabouts of Manotoc. Before
understanding of what is lawful, right or resorting to substituted service, a plaintiff
wise may be presupposed". Thus, to be of must demonstrate an effort in good faith
sufficient discretion, such person must to locate the defendant through more
know how to read and understand direct means.
English to comprehend the import of the  To allow sheriffs to describe the facts and
summons, and fully realize the need to circumstances in inexact terms would
deliver the summons and complaint to encourage routine performance of their
the defendant at the earliest possible precise duties relating to substituted
time for the person to take appropriate service. And considering that monies and
action. Thus, the person must have the properties worth millions may be lost by a
defendant because of an irregular or RULE 14.
void substituted service, it is but only fair
that the Sheriff’s Return should clearly Sec. 14. Service upon defendant whose identity or
and convincingly show the whereabouts are unknown. -- In any action where the
impracticability or hopelessness of efendant is designated as an unknown owner, or the like,
personal service. or whenever his whereabouts are unknown and cannot
be ascertained by diligent inquiry, service may, by leave
4. Granting that such a general description is
of court, be effected upon him by publication in a
adequate, there is still a serious nonconformity
newspaper of general circulation and in such places and
with the requirement that the summons must be
for such time as the court may order. (16a)
left with a (1) recipient who is a person of suitable
age and discretion; and (2) recipient must reside
in the house or residence of the defendant. Both
were not met.  In actions personam, service in person of
 The Sheriff’s Return lacks information as to summons is essential to the acquisition of
residence, age, and discretion of Mr. jurisdiction over the person of the defendant who
does not voluntarily submit himself to the
Macky de la Cruz, aside from the sheriff’s
authority of the court.
general assertion that de la Cruz is the
 Summons by publication is allowed in action
"resident caretaker" of Manotoc. against a resident unknown defendant or one
 It is doubtful if Mr. de la Cruz is residing whose whereabouts are unknown.
with Manotoc in the condominium unit
considering that a married woman of her
Rule 57.
stature in society would unlikely hire a
male caretaker to reside in her dwelling.
Sec. 1(f). Grounds upon which attachment may issue. –
 With Manotoc's allegation that Macky de At the commencement of the action or at any time
la Cruz is not her employee, servant, or before entry of judgment, a plaintiff or any proper party
representative, it is necessary to have may have the property of the adverse party attached as
additional information in the Return of security for the satisfaction of any judgment that may be
Summons. Besides, Mr. Macky de la recovered in the following cases: x x x
Cruz’s refusal to sign the Receipt for the
summons is a strong indication that he In an action against a party who does not reside
did not have the necessary "relation of and is not found in the Philippines, or on whom
confidence" with Manotoc. summons may not be served by publication. (1a)
5. The RTC relied on the presumption of regularity in
the performance of official duty. The SC
 In actions in personam, personal service of
acknowledged that this ruling is still a valid
summons is essential.
doctrine. However, for the presumption to apply,  The proper recourse for a creditor is to locate
the Sheriff’s Return must show that serious efforts properties, real or personal, belonging to such
or attempts were exerted to personally serve the debtor and cause them to be attached under
summons and that said efforts failed. These must this Rule, in which case, the attachment converts
be specifically narrated in the Return. the action into a proceeding in rem or quasi in
rem and the summons by publication may then
 The presumption of regularity in the be deemed valid and effective.
performance of official functions by the
sheriff is not applicable in this case where
it is patent that the sheriff’s return is 4. Any other manner
defective. [Venturanza v. CA]
Rule 14.
DISPOSITIVE: Petition granted. RTC and CA orders set
aside. Even assuming that Alexandra Homes Room 104 is Sec. 15. Extraterritorial service. – When the defendant
Manotoc's actual residence, such fact would not make does not reside and is not found in the Philippines, and
an irregular and void substituted service valid and the action affects the personal status of the plaintiff or
effective. relates to, or the subject of which is, property within the
Philippines, in which the defendant has or claims a lien or
interest, actual or contingent, or in which the relief
3. Publication demanded consists, wholly or in part, in excluding the
defendant from any interest therein, or the property of
the defendant has been attached within the Philippines,  Summons in a suit in personam against a resident
service may, by leave of court, be effected out of the of the philippines temporarily absent therefrom
may be validly effected by substituted service.
Philippines by personal service as under section 6; or by
publication in a newspaper of general circulation in such
places and for such time as the court may order, in which
case a copy of the summons and order of the court shall
be sent by registered mail to the last known address of Rule 57.
the defendant, or in any other manner the court may
deem sufficient. Any order granting such leave shall Sec. 1(f). Grounds upon which attachment may issue. –
specify a reasonable time, which shall not be less than At the commencement of the action or at any time
sixty (60) days after notice, within which the defendant before entry of judgment, a plaintiff or any proper party
must answer. (17a) may have the property of the adverse party attached as
security for the satisfaction of any judgment that may be
recovered in the following cases: x x x

Purpose of extraterritorial service In an action against a party who does not reside
and is not found in the Philippines, or on whom
 For complying with the requirements of fair play summons may not be served by publication. (1a)
or due process, so that the defendant will be
informed of the pendency of the action against
him and the possibility that property in the
Philippines belonging to him or in which he has  In actions in personam, personal service of
an interest may be subjected to a judgment in summons is essential.
favor of the plaintiff and he can thereby take The proper recourse for a creditor is to locate properties,
steps to protect his interest. real or personal, belonging to such debtor and cause
them to be attached under this Rule, in which case, the
attachment converts the action into a proceeding in rem
When proper or quasi in rem and the summons by publication may
then be deemed valid and effective.
 when the action affects the personal status of
the plaintiff
 when the action relates to, or the subject of
which is, property within the Philippines, in which Pennoyer v Neff (1878) – Field, J.
the defendant has or claims a lien or interest
 when the property of the non-resident defendant Plaintiff: Neff
has been attached within the Philippines
Defendant: Pennoyer
Concept: Service of Summons: Publication
When summons by publication is allowed Nature of Action: Certiorari

 In an action where the defendant is designated


as an unknown owner, or the like, or whenever his Doctrine: Proceedings in a court of law to determine the
whereabouts are unknown and cannot be personal rights and obligations of parties over whom the
ascertained by diligent inquiry (Sec. 14, Rule 14) court has not jurisdiction are invalid for want of due
 In an action where extraterritorial service is process of law.
proper (Sec. 15, Rule 15)
 In an action against a defendant who ordinarily In an action for money or damages where a defendant
resides within the Philippines but who is
does not appear in the court, and is not found within the
temporarily out of it (Sec. 16, Rule 14)
State, and is not a resident thereof, but has property
therein, the jurisdiction of the court extends only over
Rule 14. such property, the declaration expresses a principle of
general, if not universal, law. The authority of every
Sec. 16. Residents temporarily out of the Philippines. – tribunal is necessarily restricted by the territorial limits of
When any action is commenced against a defendant the State in which it is established. Any attempt to
who ordinarily resides within the Philippines, but who is exercise authority beyond those limits would be deemed
temporarily out of it, service may, by leave of court, be in every other forum, as has been said by this Court, an
also effected out of the Philippines, as under the illegitimate assumption of power, and be resisted as mere
preceding section. (18a) abuse.
Brief Facts: Mitchell brought suit against Neff to recover - The tribunals of one State have no jurisdiction over
unpaid legal fees. Mitchell published notice of the lawsuit persons beyond its limits, and can inquire only into
in an Oregon newspaper but did not serve Neff their obligations to its citizens when exercising its
conceded jurisdiction over their property within its
personally. Neff failed to appear and a default judgment
limits
was entered against him. To satisfy the judgment Mitchell - The Oregon court did not have personal jurisdiction
seized land owned by Neff so that it could be sold at a over Neff because he was not served in Oregon. The
Sheriff’s auction. When the auction was held Mitchell court’s judgment would have been valid if Mitchell
purchased it and later assigned it to Pennoyer. had attached Neff’s land at the beginning of the suit.
Mitchell could not have done this because Neff did
Neff sued Pennoyer in federal district court in Oregon to not own the land at the time Mitchell initiated the suit.
recover possession of the property, claiming that the The default judgment was declared invalid. Therefore,
the sheriff had no power to auction the real estate
original judgment against him was invalid for lack of
and title never passed to Mitchell. Neff was the legal
personal jurisdiction over both him and the land. The
owner.
court found that the judgment in the lawsuit between
Mitchell and Pennoyer was invalid and that Neff still
owned the land. Pennoyer lost on appeal and the DISPOSITIVE: Judgment for Neff affirmed.
Supreme Court granted certiorari.
Dissent (Hunt, J.): To say that a sovereign State has the
power to ordain that the property of nonresidents within
its territory may be subjected to the payment of debts
ISSUES: due to its citizens, if the property is levied upon at the
commencement of a suit, but that it has not such power
Can a state court exercise personal jurisdiction over a
if the property is levied upon at the end of the suit, is a
non-resident who has not been personally served while
within the state and whose property within the state was refinement and a depreciation of a great general
not attached before the onset of litigation? (NO) principle that, in my judgment, cannot be sustained.

RATIO: El Blanco Espanol-Filipino v Palanca (1918) - Street, J.


Plaintiff: Banco Espanol-Filipino
No. A court may enter a judgment against a non-resident Defendant: Vicente Palanca
only if the party 1) is personally served with process while Concept: Service in actions quasi in rem
within the state, or 2) has property within the state, and
that property is attached before litigation begins (i.e. Brief facts: Engracio Palanca executed a mortgage as
quasi in rem jurisdiction). security for a debt he owed to the Bank. After the
execution of the mortgage, he returned to China. He
- Since the adoption of the Fourteenth Amendment, died there. In the foreclosure proceeding, an order for
the validity of judgments may be directly questioned publication was obtained from the court, in compliance
on the ground that proceedings in a court of justice to with Sec 399 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Publication
determine the personal rights and obligations of was made in a newspaper in the City of Manila. The court
parties over whom that court has no jurisdiction do not directed that the clerk of court should deposit in the post
constitute due process of law. Due process demands office in a stamped envelop a copy of the summons and
that legal proceedings be conducted according to the complaint directed to the defendant in his last place
those rules and principles which have been of residence (Amoy, Empire of China). Whether the clerk
established in our systems of jurisprudence for the complied is unclear. However, Bernardo Chan, employee
protection and enforcement of private rights. of the attorneys for the Bank, deposited in the Manila
- To give legal proceedings any validity, there must be post office a registered letter addressed to Engracio.
a tribunal with legal authority to pass judgment, and a Bernardo probably used an envelop obtained from the
defendant must be brought within its jurisdiction by clerk’s office, as the postmaster’s receipt purports to show
service of process within the state, or by his voluntary that the letter emanated from said office.
appearance. Engracio did not appear and judgment was taken
- The substituted service of process by publication in against him by default. A decision was rendered in favour
actions brought against non-residents is valid only of the Bank. In case of Engracio’s failure to satisfy the
where property in the state is brought under the judgment, the mortgaged property located in the city of
control of the court, and subjected to its disposition by Manila should be exposed to a public sale. The payment
process adapted to that purpose, or where the never happened so the court ordered the sale of the
judgment is sought as a means of reaching such property, which was bought by the Bank. Seven years
property or affecting some interest therein; in other after the confirmation of the sale, a motion was made by
words, where the action is in the nature of a Vicente Palanca, administrator of the estate of Engracio,
proceeding in rem. requesting the court to set aside the order of default
based on the lack of jurisdiction over Engracio or over the true action in rem in the circumstance that, in the
subject of the action. This was denied. former an individual is named as defendant, and
the purpose of the proceeding is to subject his
Doctrine: In proceedings of this character, if the interest therein to the obligation or lien burdening
defendant for whom publication is made appears, the the property. All proceedings having for their sole
action becomes as to him a personal action and is object the sale or other disposition of the property
conducted as such. This, however, does not affect the of the defendant, whether by attachment,
proposition that where the defendant fails to appear the foreclosure, or other form of remedy, are in a
action is quasi in rem; and it should therefore be general way thus designated. The judgment
considered with reference to the principles governing entered in these proceedings is conclusive only
actions in rem. In an action to foreclose a mortgage between the parties.
against a nonresident, upon whom service has been • It is true that in proceedings of this character, if the
effected exclusively by publication, no personal defendant for whom publication is made appears,
judgment for the deficiency can be entered. the action becomes as to him a personal action
and is conducted as such. This, however, does not
ISSUES: affect the proposition that where the defendant
1. WON the court acquired jurisdiction. (YES) fails to appear the action is quasi in rem; and it
2. WON the foreclosure proceedings were conducted should therefore be considered with reference to
with due process. the principles governing actions in rem.
• In an ordinary attachment proceeding, if the
RATIO: defendant is not personally served, the preliminary
1. YES; the court had jurisdiction to render seizure is to be considered necessary to confer
the assailed judgment. jurisdiction upon the court. The lien on the property
• Jurisdiction over the person is acquired by the is acquired by seizure. If a lien already exists, the
voluntary appearance of a party in court and his preliminary seizure is not necessary, and the court
submission to its authority, or it is acquired by the proceeds to enforce such lien in the manner
coercive power of legal process exerted over the provided by law.
person. • In an action to foreclose a mortgage against a
• Jurisdiction over the property which is the subject nonresident, upon whom service has been
of the litigation may result either from a seizure of effected exclusively by publication, no personal
the property under legal process, whereby it is judgment for the deficiency can be entered.
brought into the actual custody of the law, or it • Ascertaining the amount due is a necessary
may result from the institution of legal proceedings precursor to the order of sale.
wherein, under special provisions of law, the power - Whatever may be the effect in other
of the court over the property is recognised and respects of the failure of the clerk of
made effective. In the latter case the property, the CFI to mail the proper papers to
though at all times within the potential power of the defendant, such irregularity
the court, may never be taken into actual custody could in no wise impair or defeat the
at all. jurisdiction of the court, for in our
• An illustration of the jurisdiction acquired by opinion that jurisdiction rests upon a
actual seizure is found in attachment basis much more secure than would
proceedings, where the property is seized at the be supplied by any form of notice
beginning of the action, or some subsequent that could be given to a resident of
stage of its progress, and held to abide the final a foreign country.
event of the litigation. An illustration of what we 2. YES; the failure of the clerk to send notice
term potential jurisdiction over the res, is found in to the defendant by mail did not infringe
the proceeding to register the title of land under the requirement of due process of law.
our system for the registration of land. Here the • Requirements of due process as
court, without taking actual physical control over it relates to a judicial
the property assumes, at the instance of some proceeding: (1) Court or tribunal
person claiming to be owner, to exercise a clothed with judicial power to
jurisdiction in rem over the property and to hear and determine the matter
adjudicate the title in favour of the petitioner before it; (2) Jurisdiction must be
against all the world. lawfully acquired over the
• In the terminology of American law the action to person of the defendant or over
foreclose a mortgage is said to be a proceeding the property which is the subject
quasi in rem, by which is expressed the idea that of the proceeding; (3)
while it is not strictly speaking an action in rem yet it Defendant must be given an
partakes of that nature and is substantially such. opportunity to be heard; (4)
The expression "action in rem" is, in its narrow Judgment must be rendered
application, used only with reference to certain upon lawful hearing.
proceedings in courts of admiralty wherein the • Though commonly called
property alone is treated as responsible for the constructive, or substituted
claim or obligation upon which the proceedings service such notification does
are based. The action quasi in rem differs from the not constitute a service of
process in any true sense. The FACTS:
provision of our law relative to Asiavest Limited filed a complaint against the defendant
the mailing of notice does not Antonio Heras praying that Heras be ordered to pay to
absolutely require the mailing of
Asiavest the amounts awarded by the Hong Kong Court
notice unconditionally and in
every event, but only in the case Judgment.
where the defendant’s
residence is known. Actual The trial court held that since the Hong Kong court
notice to the defendant in cases judgment had been duly proved, it is a presumptive
of this kind is not to be evidence of a right as between the parties; hence, the
considered absolutely party impugning it had the burden to prove want of
necessary.
jurisdiction over his person. HERAS failed to discharge that
• Property is always
assumed to be in the burden.
possession of its owner;
and he may be safely The Court of Appeals agreed with HERAS that "notice sent
held, under certain outside the state to a non-resident is unavailing to give
conditions, to be jurisdiction in an action against him personally for money
affected with recovery." Summons should have been personally served
knowledge that
on HERAS in Hong Kong, for, as claimed by ASIAVEST,
proceedings have been
instituted for its HERAS was physically present in Hong Kong for nearly 14
condemnation and years. Since there was not even an attempt to serve
sale. summons on HERAS in Hong Kong, the Hong Kong
• The failure of the clerk to Supreme Court did not acquire jurisdiction over HERAS.
mail the notice is not Nonetheless it did not totally foreclose the claim of
such an irregularity as
ASIAVEST
amounts to a denial of
due process of law.
Notice was given by ISSUE:
publication in a WON the judgment of the Hong Kong Court has been
newspaper and this is repelled by evidence of want of jurisdiction due to
the only form of notice improper notice? (YES)
which the law
unconditionally requires.
RATIO:
• The jurisdiction being once established, all that due
process of law requires is an opportunity for the Asiavest cannot now claim that Heras was a resident of
defendant to be heard; and as publication was Hong Kong at the time since the stipulated fact that
duly made in the newspaper, it would seem highly Heras "is a resident of New Manila, Quezon City,
unreasonable to hold that the failure to mail the Philippines" refers to his residence at the time jurisdiction
notice was fatal. over his person was being sought by the Hong Kong
• To vacate the judgment, the movant should court. Accordingly, since Heras was not a resident of
show that he had a good defense against the action to
Hong Kong and the action against him was, in personam,
foreclose the mortgage. That is not present here.
summons should have been personally served on him in
DISPOSITIVE: Judgment AFFIRMED. Hong Kong.

DISSENT - Malcolm, J. The extraterritorial service in the Philippines was therefore


The defendant did not receive notice and had no invalid and did not confer on the Hong Kong court
opportunity to be heard. There is no due process
jurisdiction over his person. It follows that the Hong Kong
observed here.
court judgment cannot be given force and effect here in
the Philippines for having been rendered without
Shaffer v. Heitner jurisdiction.

Asiavest vs CA (1998) – Davide Jr., J On the same note, Heras was also an absentee, hence,
Petitioner: Asiavest Limited he should have been served with summons in the same
Respondents: Court of Appeals and Antonio Herras manner as a non-resident not found in Hong Kong.
Concept: Service of Summons – Any other manner Section 17, Rule 14 of the Rules of Court providing for
extraterritorial service will not apply because the suit
Doctrine: Summons must be served personally for actions against him was in personam. Neither can we apply
in personam Section 18, which allows extraterritorial service on a
resident defendant who is temporarily absent from the
country, because even if Heras be considered as a jurisdiction between actions in rem and actions
resident of Hong Kong, the undisputed fact remains that in personam. (This is the really important part)
he left Hong Kong not only temporarily but for good. a. Actions in Personam: In an action in
personam, jurisdiction over the person of
the defendant is necessary for the court
to validly try and decide the case.
Jurisdiction over the person of a resident
defendant who does not voluntarily
Belen v Chavez (2008) –J. Tinga
appear in court can be acquired by
personal service of summons as provided
Petitioners: Dominga and Domingo Belen under Section 7, Rule 14 of the Rules of
Respondents: Hon. Chavez, Sps. Pacleb Court. If he cannot be personally served
Concept: Service to Attorney with summons within a reasonable time,
Doctrine: When a court acquires jurisdiction over a person substituted service may be made in
through counsel, death of said counsel extinguishes the accordance with Section 8 of said Rule. If
attorney-client relationship, and service to his address at he is temporarily out of the country, any
of the following modes of service may be
time of his passing is deemed insufficient
resorted to:
FACTS:
The sps. Pacleb alleged that they received a favorable i. Substituted service set forth in
judgment in the Superior Court of California, where Section 8;
$56,000 was awarded to them. The judgment ordering ii. Personal service outside the
payment was sent to San Gregorio, Laguna, and was country, with leave of court
received by Marcelo Belen. iii. Service by publication, also with
leave of court;
In 2000, Atty. Alcantara entered his appearance as
iv. Any other manner the court may
counsel for the sps. Belen, as he was a retainer of the
deem sufficient.
Belen’s relatives. In his answer, he pointed out that his b. Action in personam, defendant is a non-
clients were actually residents of California. resident who does not voluntarily submit
In 2003, the RTC ruled against the Belens, holding them himself to the authority of the court:
liable to pay their debt. However, the decision intended personal service of summons within the
for Atty. Alcantara was returned with the notation state is essential to the acquisition of
jurisdiction over her person. This method
“addressee deceased”, as he had passed away during
of service is possible if such defendant is
the pendency of the case. The decision sent to the physically present in the country. If he is
Belen’s “last known residence” in Laguna was received not found therein, the court cannot
by a Leopold Avacilla. acquire jurisdiction over his person and
In November 2003, the sps. Chavez sought the execution therefore cannot validly try and decide
of the decision, and properties of the Belens were levied the case against him.
and scheduled for public auction to satisfy the judgment. c. Actions in rem: Jurisdiction over the
person of the defendant is not a
In 16 Dec. 2003, Atty. Culvera entered his appearance as
prerequisite to confer jurisdiction on the
counsel for the Belens, and filed a motion to quash the court provided that the court acquires
writ of execution. When the same was denied, he jurisdiction over the res. Nonetheless,
appealed to the CA, which ruled in favor of the Sps. summons must be served upon the
Chavez. defendant not for the purpose of vesting
the court with jurisdiction but merely for
satisfying the due process requirements.
ISSUES:
Thus, where the defendant is a non-
(1) WON the court acquired jurisdiction to try the
resident who is not found in the Philippines
case over the Sps. Belen (YES)
and (1) the action affects the personal
(2) WON there was a valid service of judgment (NO)
status of the plaintiff; (2) the action relates
to, or the subject matter of which is
property in the Philippines in which the
RATIO: defendant has or claims a lien or interest;
(3) the action seeks the exclusion of the
1. YES, Atty. Alcantara’s act of filing numerous pleadings defendant from any interest in the
as authorized by the sps. Belen was enough to vest the property located in the Philippines; or (4)
court with jurisdiction over them. the property of the defendant has been
attached in the Philippines— service of
summons may be effected by (a)
A. The rule is that a party is only ever bound by a personal service out of the country, with
decision if the court first had jurisdiction over leave of court; (b) publication, also with
them. However, there is a distinction to be leave of court; or (c) any other manner
made when it comes to acquisition of the court may deem sufficient.
B. The case at bar is an action in personam, and
it was duly established that the petitioners were
permanent residents of Califronia, USA. Thus,
the court did not acquire jurisdiction by
summons to their last known address. However,
it did acquire jurisdiction by virtue of their
submission to the court, seen in Atty.
Alcantara’s action as their representative.

2. NO. Upon the death of Atty. Alcantara, the lawyer-


client relationship between him and petitioners has
ceased, thus, the service of the RTC decision on him is
ineffective and did not bind petitioners. Service of
judgment to their last known address was likewise
ineffective, as they were already permanent residents of
California. Thus, the judgment only became final and
executory upon its receipt by Atty. Culvera on 29 Dec.
2003. (The effect of this was that the appeal was within
time)

DISPOSITIVE:, CA decision reversed