August 29, 2019

Remedial law Review 2

Memorize everything

Have an overview of the entire rules, take notice of the number of sections as these is telling of the
importance of each one. IE Rule 70 which is unlawful detainer/forcible entry has 21 sections, the most.
And in real life these are the most common cases.

Q: what is the subject matter of the interpleader?

- Property wether real or personal, the performance of an obligation

Q: which court has the jurisdiction if the object is the performance of an obligation

- RTC because it is incapable of pecuniary estimation

Q: Peculiarities of Interpleader

- Plaintiff has no interest over the subject matter

- There can be no interpleader if there is only 1 defendant, there must be two.

Q: can a counterclaim be possible here?

CASES:

Wackwack Golf : Wackwack Golf should have interposed a compulsory claim. An interpleader is
doctrinally a compulsory counterclaim. (Section 2, of Rule 9) If a compulsory counterclaim is not
interposed in the right time, it is deemed waived. And in this case an interpleader is a compulsory
counterclaim. It was not filed in time by Wackwack.

Q: is this absolute? That the counterclaimed if not interposed in time is forever barred.

- No. in the case of omitted of counterclaim. (sec10 Rule 11)

ETERNAL GARDENS

STUDY THE CASE OF BANK OF COMMERCE VS pLANTERS as this is the latest case on interpleader.

- Answer in interpleader. Counterclaim is DIFFERENT from an answer. In the answer you can
interpose an interpleader. Because the BSP made the interpleader in their answer.
QUO WARRANTO

Cases:

CALLEJA VS PANDAY

- Quo warranto is not applicable here as the subject in issue here are private offices and not
PUBLIC office.

Q: when should the OSG file? When should the prosecutor file?

- OSG on its own

Differentiate QUO WARRANTO in the Omnibus Election Code and in Rule 66.

Q: which court do you file the case of Quo Warranto:

MENDOZA VS ALLIAS

- Can a judgement in quo warranto be executed against a public officer occupying the public
office? No. the public officer must be made a party in the case. In this case the new occupant,
Olorez was not a party to the vase, as Allias was promoted.

Q: What is the Venue(section 4, rule 4)

- That place provided for by law.

REPUBLIC VS SERRENO

Q: who is a ‘relator’

Q:What remedial law doctrines have been sustained in this case? What were overturned?
Enhanced?

- Doctrine on Venue, enhanced:

- Hierarchy of Courts, enhanced
- Transcendental Importance, enhanced

Q: what are the new doctrines here laid? Possible questions for the BAR

- Remedy of Quo Warranto against an impeachable officer. There are two remedies, one is
political or thru the legislature and the other is judicial. Although they have the same objective,
they are separate and distinct. They can be used simultaneously. They are different as to nature,
origin and procedure.
- Sec. 11 : Justice Serreno offered the defense that the petition should fail based on limitations.
Tijam said, accrual is from discovery and that Prescription does not lie against the government
DECLARATORY RELIEF

Q: what is the prayer in declaratory relief?

- To determine the rights of the plaintiffs under the said statute etc, includes wills.

** the second paragraph is not declaratory relief PROPER but is SIMILAR REMEDIES

Q: where are you going to file similar remedies?

- Llllll

MUST REMEMBER THE DIFFERENCE IN THE CASES OF SABITSANA VS MERTUIGI and MALANA VS TAPA

Q: when is the petitioner required to notify the OSG.

- Statutes, Eos. However if the ordinances and resolutions involve a question on

CONSTITUTIONALITY then the OSG should also be notified.

In Declaratory Relief there are no affirmative reliefs, there are only declarations of the parties rights.

BATHALA MARKETING CASE

- 6 requisites of DR. 2 were added from the original 4

1. Subject matter
2. The case must be justiciable.
3. The parties to the case must have adverse interests
4. No breach yet **
5. The justiciable controversy must be ripe for determination
6. No remedy in the ordinary course of law

**Sec. 6: Conversion into Ordinary Action

- It should not transgress jurisdictional issues.

Jurisdiction issues:
1. Original Jurisdiction ie what are the EXCLUSIVE ORIGINAL JURISDICTION of SC, RTC , MTC. Study RA
7691
RULE 64 : REVIEW OF JUDGEMENTS AND FINAL ORDERS OR RESOLUTIONS OF THE COMELEC AND COA

What is the difference of 64 and 65

1. Neypes Doctrine – study and read this case again. The Neypes Doctrine does not apply in Rule
64.
2. You cannot file Certiorari under Rule 65 without filing an MR. this is the general rule.

RULE 65: CERTIORARI, PROHIBITION, MANDAMUS

Read the case of City of Manila vs Judge Cuerdo. Split Jurisdiction. This was given in the Bar.

There are 3 kinds of actions in this Rule.

There are only 6 issues:

1. Who is the petitioner

2. Who are the respondents
3. What are the grounds
4. What functions did the respondents perform
5. What is common to these 3 actions
6. What is the relief prayed for

-1. Anyone

-2. It would depend upon the action: (A) Certiorari : Tribunal, Board, Officer (B) Mandamus: Tribunal,
Board, Officer, Corporation or Person (C) Tribunal, Board, Officer, Corporation, Officer

-3. Certiorari : lack of jurisdiction, grave abuse of discretion

Prohibition: same as certiorari

Mandamus: unlawfully neglects to do a duty, excludes a person from the enjoyment of a right or office
of which one is entitled.

---- Differentiate mandamus from quo warranto

1. The person to implead. In mandamus who is impleaded is the person who caused the
usurpation.

-4. Only applied to Judicial or quasi-judicial function. – Certiorari, Prohibition

- what is a judicial function? Interpretation of the law.Quasi-judicial, it is a share of a judicial

function.

Ministerial - Mandamus

CASES: TUZAON VS REGISTER OF DEEDS

-5. No appeal or any other plain or adequate remedy under ordinary course of law. – because the
subject matter is not appealable ie interlocutory orders

Sec 4 until Sec 9 of the Rule applies to all 3 provisions.

3 grounds for dismissal:

1. Patently without merit

2. Filed manifestly To cause delay
3. Issues are insubstantial which merit no consideration

-6. Recall the order, directs the respondent to comment. The Court may render judgement on the
petition. The Court can order oral arguments.

Amendatory Provisions: AM 7-7-12-SC

Grounds for Minute dismissal: patently without merit, to cause delay, insubstantial. The Court can
sanction penalties TRIPLE the amount not only to the petitioners but also to the lawyer.