Rule 3: Parties to Civil Actions

Section 1: CAPACITY TO BE PARTIES TO A CIVIL ACTION

1. NATURAL PERSONS  full legal capacity and capacity to act.
2. JURIDICAL PERSONS  Art. 44 of the Civil Code
a. The State and its political subdivisions — but remember the doctrine of state immunity from suit
b. Other corporations, institutions and entities for public interest or purpose, created by law
c. Corporations, partnerships and associations for private interest or purpose to which the law grants a juridical personality,
separate and distinct from that of each shareholder, partner or member
3. ENTITIES AUTHORIZED BY LAW
a. Foreign Corporations
i. Isolated transaction — can sue and be sued
ii. Doing business and not licensed here — can NOT sue, but can be sued
o EXCEPT — if other party is estopped because he benefitted from dealing with such corporation.
iii. Doing business and licensed — can sue and be sued
b. Political parties
c. Labor unions
d. Roman Catholic Church
e. Estate (Rule 3, Sec. 20)
f. Entities without a juridical personality, as defendants (Rule 3, Sec. 15)
 Cannot sue, but can be sued
 Can NOT institute under the name of the non-juridical entity. They have to sue individually.
 But they can be parties as defendants, and named as such.
 Ex. Sole proprietorships
g. Executors or Administrators (Rule 87, Section 1)
h. Corporation by Estoppel — Under the corporation code, a corporation by estoppel is precluded from denying its existence
and the members thereof can be sued and be held liable as general partners.
i. Dissolved Corporation — A dissolved corporation may prosecute and defend suits by or against it provided that the suits (i)
occur within three (3) years after its dissolution, and (ii) the suits are in connection with the settlement and closure of its
affairs
j. Partnership— having a capital of three thousand pesos or more but which fails to comply with the registration
requirements is nevertheless liable as a partnership to third person

 Capacity of the parties must be averred in the pleadings (Rule 8.4)

 Remedies when person has no legal capacity to be a party:
1. MTD
2. Affirmative defense

Section 2 and 19: RPI

 RULE — EVERY ACTION MUST BE PROSECUTED OR DEFENDED IN THE NAME OF THE REAL PARTY IN INTEREST (RPI)
o Interest must be REAL, MATERIAL and DIRECT
o A managing director is not the RPI if what is involved is the contract of the corporation itself
o RPI ONLY applies to suits between private parties
o Locus standii – applies to public suits (constitutional suits)
o Remedy if suit NOT prosecuted in the name of RPI
a. MTD
b. Affirmative defense
 “pleading states NO cause of action (16.1.g)  also used when defendant has no capacity to be sued
 EX: Rule on RPI is relaxed
1. An agent acting in his own name AND for the benefit of an undisclosed principal may sue or be sued without joining the
principal, except when property belonging to the principal is involved. (Rule 3, Sec. 3)
2. In case of class suits (Rule 3, Sec. 12)
3. In case of transfers of interest (Rule 3, Sec. 19)
 Jurisprudence on RPI
o If labor union fails to include name of the employee they represent in petition for certiorari, the court rightly dismissed
petition
o Suit against a government employee like zone administrator of an economic zone, RPI is the Republic
 o When two sets of stockholders file a derivate suits based on the same facts, alleging the same causes of action, and praying
for the same reliefs, it’s tantamount to allowing the corporation to file the same suit twice. This results to forum-shopping
which is not allowed.
o Other co-owners are dispensable parties

Section 3: REPRESENTATIVES AS PARTIES

 If the beneficiary’s name is not included in the title, the defect can be cured by the simple expedient of requiring the association
to disclose the names of the principals and to amend the title and averments of the petition accordingly

Section 4: SPOUSES AS PARTIES

 EX:
1. Suit against each other
2. Based on a criminal act
3. If they are suing as owners of their exclusive property
4. If their properties are governed by complete separation of property
5. Abandonment
6. If against the exclusive property of spouses
7. Suits involving the practice of one’s profession

Section 5: MINORS OR INCOMPETENT PERSONS AS PARTIES

 A person need not be judicially declared to be incompetent. It is enough that he be alleged to be incompetent

Section 6: PERMISSIVE JOINDER OF PARTIES

 SEE codal

Section 7, 8, 9, 11: Indispensable and Necessary Parties

INDISPENSABLE AND NECESSARY PARTIES
 Kinds of parties for purposes of joining them as parties —
1. Indispensable party — One who has such an interest in the controversy or subject matter that a final adjudication cannot
be made, in his absence, without injuring or affecting that interest. They are real parties in interest without whom no final
determination can be had of an action. Such as:
a. Co-owners in an action for partion of an undivided interest in land.
b. Vendee in an action for annulment of a contract of sale.
c. Those with titled claims over the land in a petition for reconstitution of title.
2. Necessary parties — One who is not indispensable
o NOTE — The plaintiff may choose to file a separate case against the necessary party not impleaded, but they ought
to be joined to avoid multiple litigation.
o Example — In an action to recover possession of property, the holder of the title is a necessary party while the
actual possessor is an indispensable party
COMPULSORY JOINDER OF INDISPENSABLE PARTIES
 RULE — INDISPENSABLE PARTIES MUST BE JOINED EITHER AS PLAINTIFFS OR DEFENDANTS. THE ABSENCE OF AN
INDISPENSABLE PARTY RENDERS ALL SUBSEQUENT ACTIONS OF THE COURT NULL AND VOID FOR WANT OF AUTHORITY TO
ACT, NOT ONLY AS TO THE ABSENT PARTIES BUT EVEN AS TO THOSE PRESENT.
o Because it would be a violation of due process of law
o The burden of procuring the presence of all indispensable parties is on the plaintiff
o Consequence of failure to join indispensable parties (SEE sec 11)
o If constant refusal to implead indispensable party, court in its discretion choose to dismiss a complaint due to plaintiff’s
own fault (Rule 17)
JOINDER OF NECESSARY PARTIES
 RULE — THE COURT MAY, IN ITS DISCRETION, CHOOSE TO ORDER NECESSARY PARTIES TO BE JOINED IN THE ACTION.
 When it comes to necessary parties, observe the following rules —
1. If the court finds the reason for the omission meritorious (the court didn’t order the joinder of the necessary party) —
The judgment rendered against the impleaded parties will NOT prejudice the rights of the necessary parties not impleaded.
2. If the court finds the reason for the omission unmeritorious — It may order the inclusion of the omitted necessary party if
jurisdiction over his person may be obtained.
3. If, after the order (if it found the omission unmeritorious), the pleader fails to comply, without justifiable cause, with the
order of the court (and provided that jurisdiction over the person may be obtained) — Then it will be deemed a waiver of
the claim against such necessary party.
Section 10: Unwilling co-Plaintiff
 SEE codal

Section 11: Misjoinder and Non-Joinder of Parties

 RULE — MISJOINDER NOR NON-JOINDER OF PARTIES ARE NOT GROUNDS FOR DISMISSAL
o Misjoinder — A party is misjoined when he is made a party to the action although he should not be impleaded.
o Non-Joinder — A party is not joined when he is supposed to be joined but is not impleaded in the action.
o The court should order the joinder of such party and non-compliance with the said order would be a ground for the
dismissal of the action.
 It’s the non-compliance with the order which is the ground for dismissal under Rule 17, not the misjoinder itself
o If the court fails to order the joinder of indispensable parties  renders all subsequent actions of the court null and VOID
for want of authority to act, not only as to the absent parties but even as to those present. The fact that the court failed to
notice will not validate the judgment.

Section 12: Class Suit

 a number of persons may bring the suit as representatives of a certain class of people who share the same interests.
 The class suit will bind all members of the class, despite the fact that they are not really parties to the case.
 REQIUSITES —
1. Subject matter of the case is one of common or general interest to many persons
2. The interested persons are so numerous that it is impracticable to join them all as parties
3. The parties bringing the class suit are sufficiently numerous or representative of the class and can fully protect the interests
of all concerned. (Adequacy of representation) (Lascona Land Co. vs CIR 2012). The court must consider —
a. Whether the interest of the named party is coextensive with the interest of the other members of the class
b. The proportion of those made a party, as it so bears, to the total membership of the class
c. Any other factor bearing on the ability of the named party to speak for the rest of the class.
 In an action instituted by homeowner’s association on behalf of the homeowners is this a class suit?
o NO. It is an action in an representative capacity under Rule 3, Sec. 3. (MIAA vs Rivera, 2005)
SUITS BY STOCKHOLDERS BASED ON WRONGFUL OR FRAUDULENT ACTS OF DIRECTORS OR OTHER PERSONS
1. Individual suits — Where a stockholder or member is denied the right of inspection, his suit would be individual because the
wrong is done to him personally and not to the other stockholders or the corporation.
2. Class or representative suit — Where the wrong is done to a group of stockholders, as where preferred stockholders' rights are
violated, a class or representative suit will be proper for the protection of all stockholders belonging to the same group.
3. Derivative suit — in cases of mismanagement where the wrongful acts are committed by the directors or trustees themselves
o REQUISITES —
a. The party bringing suit should be a shareholder as of the time of the act or transaction complained of, the number of his
shares not being material
b. He has tried to exhaust intra-corporate remedies, i.e., has made a demand on the board of directors for the appropriate
relief but the latter has failed or refused to heed his plea
c. The cause of action actually devolves on the corporation, the wrongdoing or harm having been, or being caused to the
corporation and not to the particular stockholder bringing the suit. (Legaspi Towers 300 vs Muer 2012)

Section 13: Alternative Defendants

 NOTE — Just be careful, because this will open yourself up to counter-suits.

Section 14 & 15: Unknown Defendants

 Entities without juridical personality (such as an unregistered partnership or unincorporated corporation) cannot sue as an
entity they will have to file as individuals. But they can be sued as an entity.
 Service of summons may be effected upon all the defendants by serving upon any one of them; or upon the person in charge of
the office or place of business maintained under such name.
 Their answer must reveal the names and addresses of the persons composing it, so that the judgment rendered against them
shall set out their individual or proper names.

Section 16: Substitution in Case of Death of any Party

PROCEDURE OF SUBSTITUTION IN CASE OF DEATH OF ANY PARTY
1. STEP 1 — DETERMINE IF THE ACTION IS STILL PENDING
2. STEP 2 — DETERMINE WHETHER THE PENDING ACTION SURVIVES OR NOT (SEE RULE 87)
a. If the injury complained of affects primarily and principally property or property rights and the injuries to the person
being merely incidental — the action will survive and is NOT extinguished
 1) Money claims,
2) actions to recover real and personal property from the estate,
3) actions to enforce a lien thereon,
4) actions to recover damages for an injury to person or property,
5) actions to recover damages arising from delicts,
6) ejectment cases,
7) action for quieting title,
8) actions based on negligence
b. If the injury complained of is to the person and the injuries to the property are incidental — then the action will NOT
survive and will be extinguished upon the death of such party.
1) Annulment of marriage,
2) legal separation – even if it involves changes in the property relations, action for support
3. STEP 3 — ONCE YOU DETERMINE WHETHER THE ACTION IS PENDING AND THE CLAIM IS NOT EXTINGUISHED, THEN NOTICE
OF DEATH MUST BE GIVEN TO THE COURT
4. STEP 4 — THE COURT WILL ISSUE AN ORDER THE REPRESENTATIVE TO APPEAR AND ISSUE AN ORDER OF SUBSTITUTION
a. Legal Heirs (without requiring the appointment of an executor or administrator)
b. Administrator
c. Executor
d. Guardian
o NOTE — This is an important list, the substitution of someone who does not fall into this list is an invalid
substitution. (Sumaljag v Literato, 2008)
o Service of summons is NOT required to effect a substitution.
o The atty of the deceased does he become the counsel of the heirs of the deceased unless his services are engaged
by said heirs.
EFFECT OF FAILURE TO OBSERVE THE PROCEDURE FOR SUBSTITUTION
 RULE — THE PROCEEDINGS IS INVALIDATED AND THE JUDGMENT IS VOID FOR VIOLATION OF DUE PROCESS
o because the court acquired no jurisdiction over the person of the legal representative of heirs of the deceased because no
man should be affected by a proceeding to which he is a stranger.
o Lack of jurisdiction over the person, being subject to waiver, is a personal defense which can only be asserted by the party
who can thereby waive it by silence.
o non-compliance therewith results in the undeniable violation of the right to due process of those who, though not duly
notified of the proceedings, are substantially affected by the decision rendered therein
o if there are multiple parties, and only some died, but the court did not order substitution, judgment will be valid as to the
parties who did not die. But void as to parties who were not validly substituted. (Brioso vs Mariano)
 EXCEPT — WHEN THE PARTY TO BE SUBSTITUTED ACTIVELY PARTICIPATES AND VOLUNTARILY SUBMITS HIMSELF TO THE
JURISDICTION OF THE COURT, SUCH THAT THERE IS NO DENIAL OF DUE PROCESS
o Formal substitution is not necessary when the heirs themselves voluntarily appeared in the action, participated therein and
presented evidence in defense of deceased defendant. (Brioso vs Mariano)

Section 20: Action on Contractual Money Claims in Which Defendant Dies

 REQUISITES —
1. Money claim from contract
2. Defendant dies (not the plaintiff) before entry of final judgment in the court in which the action was pending
 Action shall NOT be dismissed but shall instead be allowed to continue until the entry of final judgment.
 So, no substitution but the action still continues. This operates as an exception to the rule in Rule 3, Sec. 16.
o If based on a contract — file money claim against the estate in the probate court.
o If based on tort or delict — file the claim against the executor or administrator.

Section 17: SUBSTITUTION IN CASE OF DEATH OR SEPARATION OF A PARTY WHO IS A PUBLIC OFFICER
 SEE codal

Section 18: INCOMPETENCY OR INCAPACITY OF PARTY

 SEE codal

Section 19: TRANSFER OF INTEREST

 Transferees pendente lite are not indispensable parties and NOT even necessary parties.
Section 21: Indigent Parties
 Observe the following two-tier test —
1. Indigent litigant as a matter of right under Rule 141, Sec. 9
a. Gross income and immediate family income does not exceed twice of monthly minimum wage
b. Does not own real property with FMV (as stated in current tax declaration) of more than P300,000
2. Indigent litigant as a matter of discretion under Rule 3, Sec. 21
 Benefits given to indigent litigants?
1. Exemption from payment of transcripts of stenographic notes — This is free
2. Exemption from Docket/Filing and other lawful fees — But lien on any judgment rendered in the case favorable to the
indigent, unless the court otherwise provides.
 What if a party is declared as an Indigent Party but later was found out to lack the requirements?
o Rule 141, Sec. 19 — Any falsity in the affidavit of litigant or disinterested person shall be sufficient cause to dismiss the
complaint or action or to strike out the pleading of that party, without prejudice to whatever criminal liability may have
been incurred.
o Rule 3, Sec. 21 — The proper docket and other lawful fees shall be assessed and collected by the clerk of court. If payment
is not made within the time fixed by the court, execution shall issue or the payment thereof, without prejudice to such
other sanctions as the court may impose.

Section 22: Notice to Solicitor General

 SEE codal
 Rule 2: Cause of Action

Section 2: Overview of “Cause of Action”

 NATURE AND ELEMENTS OF A CAUSE OF ACTION
o It is an act or omission of one party in violation of the legal right or rights of the other.
o It is based on the number of breaches, for every breach (act or omission in violation of the rights of the plaintiff) there is
one cause of action
 Elements of a Cause of Action —
1. Legal right — A right in favor of the plaintiff by whatever means and under whatever law it arises or is created;
2. Legal obligation — An obligation on the part of the named defendant to respect or not to violate such right;
3. Breach — Act or omission on the part of such defendant in violation of the right of the plaintiff or constituting a breach of
the obligation of the defendant to the plaintiff for which the latter may maintain an action for recovery of damages or other
appropriate relief
 WHEN MUST THE CAUSE OF ACTION EXIST?
o RULE — THE CAUSE OF ACTION MUST EXIST AT THE TIME THE COMPLAINT IS FILED
o If filed before its existence, the action is premature

FAILURE TO ASSERT OR STATE A CAUSE OF ACTION

 Where there is a defect or an insufficiency in the statement of the cause of action, a complaint may be dismissed not because of
an absence or a lack of a cause of action but because the complaint “states no cause of action”
FAILURE TO STATE A CAUSE OF ACTION V.S. LACK OF CAUSE OF ACTION

Failure to State a Cause of Action Lack of a Cause of Action

Defect contemplated Refers to the insufficiency of the pleading
How raised Raised in a motion to dismiss under Rule 16 before a
responsive pleading is filed and can be determined only
from the allegations of the pleading and not from
evidentiary matters.
Refers to the insufficiency of the evidence
Raised in a demurrer to evidence under
Rule 33 after the plaintiff has rested his
case and can be resolved only on the basis
of the evidence he has presented in
support of his claim

RULES TO OBSERVE IN DETERMINING WHETHER THE PLEADING ASSERTING THE CLAIM ‘STATES NO CAUSE OF ACTION’
1. WHETHER OR NOT THE PLEADING STATES A CAUSE OF ACTION MUST BE DETERMINED ONLY FROM THE FACTS ALLEGED IN THE
PLEADING, AND THE COURT CANNOT CONSIDER OTHER MATTERS ALIUNDE (outside source)
 EXCEPT — Inquiry is not confined to the complaint if culled from (Aquino vs Quiazon 2015) —
a. Annexes and other pleadings submitted by the parties — In some cases, the court considered the documents attached to
the complaint to truly determine sufficiency of cause of action.
b. Documentary evidence admitted by stipulation which disclose facts sufficient to defeat the claim
c. Evidence admitted in the course of hearings related to the case —ex. prior hearings conducted on provisional remedies.
2. THE TEST IS WHETHER, ASSUMING THAT THE ALLEGATIONS OF FACT IN THE COMPLAINT TO BE “HYPOTHETICALLY” TRUE, A
VALID JUDGMENT COULD BE RENDERED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PRAYER STATED THEREIN
3. THE CAUSE OF ACTION IN A COMPLAINT IS NOT WHAT THE DESIGNATION OF THE COMPLAINT STATES, BUT WHAT THE
ALLEGATIONS IN THE BODY OF THE COMPLAINT DEFINE AND DESCRIBE
4. IF THE GROUND FOR DISMISSAL IS RAISED AS AN AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE IN THE ANSWER (INSTEAD OF RAISING IT IN A
MOTION TO DISMISS), THE COURT CANNOT HOLD A PRELIMINARY HEARING.

Section 1: Basis of Ordinary Civil Actions

 Note that the rule makes no reference to a special civil action. Most SCAs need not be based on a cause of action.

Section 3 & 4: Splitting of Causes of Action

 Splitting — Multiple actions/suits based on one cause of action. It is the act of instituting two or more suits for the same cause
of action
 Joinder — One action/suit based on multiple causes of actions
 RULE — IF TWO OR MORE SUITS ARE INSTITUTED ON THE BASIS OF THE SAME CAUSE OF ACTION, THE FILING OF ONE OR A
JUDGMENT UPON THE MERITS IN ANY ONE IS AVAILABLE AS A GROUND FOR THE DISMISSAL OF THE OTHERS
o the entire amount arises from one and the same act or contract which must, thus, be sued for in one action, or the several
parts arise from distinct and different acts or contracts, for which a party may maintain separate suits. (Marilag vs
Martinez 2015)
 o Example — The act of a defendant in taking possession of the plaintiffs land by means of force and intimidation constitutes
a single act of dispossession but gives rise to two reliefs: (a) recovery of possession, and (b) damages arising from the loss of
possession. Both of these reliefs result from a single wrong hence, constitute but a single cause of action. Each of them
cannot be the subject of two separate actions. Both remedies must be alleged and claimed in only one complaint.
o Example — If a car owner sustains injuries to his person and damage to his car as a result of the negligent driving of the
defendant, two rights of the plaintiffs have been violated, namely, his personal right to be safe in his person and his property
right to have his car intact and free from any damage. The plaintiff can only file a single action for the recovery of
damages for both types of injuries.
 If however, a passenger in the same car was also injured, the injuries to the passenger gives rise to a cause of
action separate and distinct from those sustained by the car owner because distinct rights belonging to different
persons have been violated. The injured passenger may file a suit against the defendant separate from the suit filed
by the car owner.
o Examples of causes of actions which cannot be split —
1) Recovery of property and damages
2) Annulment of foreclosure sale and damages (Chua v MBTC, 2009)
3) Recovery of ownership of and income from same land
4) Installments due and unpaid
5) Non-payment of debt secured by a mortgage (you can’t split it to payment of debt and foreclosure of mortgage, you
have to choose one)
6) Recovery of income/rentals of co-owned property and the partition of the property itself
 Splitting can be raised either by means of —
1. A motion to dismiss
2. Affirmative defense in the answer
 Is “splitting of a cause of action” a ground?
o NO. This is not one of the grounds provided for under Rule 16. Instead, raise either of the following grounds —
1. Res judicata (One case decided, others are pending)
2. Litis pendentia (all cases are pending)
 Splitting a cause of action is a mode of forum shopping by filing multiple cases based on the same cause of action, but with
different prayers‣
 Adverse consequences of forum-shopping
1. If the forum shopping is NOT considered willful and deliberate — the subsequent case shall be dismissed without
prejudice, on the ground of either litis pendentia or res judicata.
2. If the forum shopping is willful and deliberate — both (or all, if there are more than two) actions shall be dismissed with
prejudice. (Chua vs Metrobank 2009)
TESTS TO ASCERTAIN WHETHER TWO OR MORE SUITS RELATE TO A SINGLE OR COMMON CAUSE OF ACTION
1. Whether the same evidence would support and sustain both the first and second causes of action (also known as the “same
evidence” test)
2. Whether the defenses in one case may be used to substantiate the complaint in the other
3. Whether the cause of action in the second case existed at the time of the filing of the first complaint.
BREACH OF CONTRACT AS A CAUSE OF ACTION
 GR: a contract to do several things at several times is divisible, and a judgment for a single breach of a continuing contract is not
a bar to a suit for a subsequent breach.
 EX: where the contract is entire, and the breach total, there can be only one action in which plaintiff must recover all damages.
MERE INCIDENTS OF A CAUSE OF ACTION
 Claim of damages as mere incident of a claim of money  still only one cause of action
PROMISSORY NOTES
 If there are several promissory notes, but only one loan, and no payment on all notes, there are several causes of action (since
based on each promissory notes)

Section 5: JOINDER OF CAUSES OF ACTION

CONCEPT OF JOINDER OF CAUSES OF ACTION
 It is the assertion of as many causes of action (in the alternative or otherwise) as a party may have against another in one
pleading alone. It is the process of uniting two or more demands or rights of action in one action.
o Example — D is the debtor of C for P350,000.00 due on January 5, 2011. D likewise owes C P350,000.00 due on February 13,
2011. Both debts are evidenced by distinct promissory notes and incurred for different reasons. D has not paid the debts
despite demand. Each debt is a separate cause of action because each is the subject of a different transaction. However,
under the rule on joinder of causes of action, C may file a single suit against D for the collection of both debts, despite the
claims being actually separate causes of action and having arisen out of different transactions.
RULE IN CASE OF JOINDER OF CAUSES OF ACTION
1. HE MUST COMPLY WITH THE RULES ON JOINDER OF PARTIES (RULE 3, SEC. 6)
 2 parties only — can join as many causes of action, even if totally unrelated
 Multiple parties — can only join the causes of action if it complies with the rule on joinder, meaning series of actions arising
from the same or series of transactions involving a common question of law.
Rules on Joinder of Parties (3.6) —
1. The cause of action arises from the same series of transactions
2. It involves a common question of law
2. ORDINARY CIVIL ACTIONS, SPECIAL CIVIL ACTIONS OR ACTIONS GOVERNED BY SPECIAL RULES CANNOT BE JOINED TOGETHER
 Thus, two special civil actions cannot be joined together, one ordinary and one SCA cannot be joined, two actions governed
by special rules cannot be joined.
 BUT — You can join certiorari, prohibition and mandamus in one action since they are all covered by Rule 65. (Salvador)
o Example — You can’t join an ejectment case with money claims because ejectment cases are governed by special
rules on summary procedure.
3. AT LEAST ONE CAUSE OF ACTION MUST FALL WITHIN THE PROPER JURISDICTION AND VENUE OF THE RESPECTIVE COURT
WHERE THE PLEADING WAS FILED
 If one cause of action falls within the RTC and the other in the MTC, the action should be filed in the RTC.
 Apply the “Totality Rule” in case of money claims — Where the claims in all the causes of action are principally for
recovery of money, the aggregate amount claimed shall be the test of jurisdiction.
 Does this mean we can’t have joinder of real action and personal action?
o NO. You can still do it, using Sec 5(c), but you just don’t use the totality rule.
ALTERNATIVE CAUSES OF ACTION
 You can have alternative causes of action against multiple/different parties?
1. Alternative causes of actions are allowed — See Rule 3, Sec. 6
o Example — First cause of action is based on contract. Second cause of action is based on tort. Both are pleaded in
the alternative.
2. Alternative defendants are also allowed — See Rule 3, Sec. 13

Section 6: Misjoinder of Causes of Action

 Example — if an action for forcible entry is joined in one complaint with the causes of actions based on several promissory
notes, the complaint should not be dismissed based on the misjoinder of the forcible entry case. Instead, the cause of action
predicated on forcible entry may be severed from the complaint upon motion of a party or by the court motu proprio and
proceeded with separately in another action.
 Failure to OBJECT will render the defect is waived
 Rule 6: Kinds of Pleadings
OVERVIEW OF PLEADINGS
NECESSITY AND PURPOSE OF PLEADINGS
 It is necessary, in order to confer jurisdiction on a court, that the subject matter be presented for its consideration in a mode
sanctioned by law and this is done by the filing of a complaint or other pleading.
CONSTRUCTION OF PLEADINGS
 All pleadings shall be liberally construed so as to do substantial justice
 While it is the rule that pleadings should be liberally construed, it is also a rule that a party is strictly bound by the allegations,
statements or admissions made in his pleadings and cannot be permitted to take a contradictory position.
 In case there are ambiguities in the pleadings, the same must be construed most strongly against the pleader and that no
presumptions in his favor are to be indulged in.

Section 1: Pleadings Defined

 SEE codal

Section 2: Pleadings Allowed

CLAIMS
1. Complaint
2. Counterclaim
3. Cross-claim
4. Third-Party Complaint
5. Complaint-in-intervention
DEFENSES
1. Answer (to the pleading asserting a claim)
2. Reply

Section 3: Complaint
 Only essential facts constituting the plaintiff’s cause of action need to be averred, Not legal conclusions or
evidentiary/immaterial facts
 BUT — in actionable documents, you have to put the substance of the document or its whole contents (See Rule 8, Sec 7)
 NOTE — In case of allegations of “fraud and mistake”, there is a need aver with particularity. For the rest, general allegations
will suffice.
 Contain the relief prayed for  This is the prayer
What is the significance of filing the original complaint?
1. Signifies the commencement of the civil action
2. The court also acquires jurisdiction over the person of the plaintiff.
3. It also has the effect of interrupting the prescription of actions under the civil code
o BUT — remember that it is not simply the filing of the complaint or appropriate initiatory pleading but the
payment of the prescribed docket fee, that vests a trial court with jurisdiction over the subject matter or nature of
the action

Section 4: Answer
 Failure to file the Answer within the reglamentary period may lead to default on the part of the defendant (See Rule 9)
 See Rule 11.

Section 5: Defenses
KINDS OF DEFENSES
1. NEGATIVE DEFENSE
 SEE — Rule 8, Sec. 10 and 11 for more details on Specific Denial
2. AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSE

Section 6: Counterclaim
 a way of preventing multiplicity of suits by allowing in one action the determination of the entire controversies between the
parties.
 a counterclaim be incorporated in the Answer
 a counterclaim CANNOT be incorporated in a Motion to Dismiss
o A party who desires to plead a compulsory counterclaim should not file a motion to dismiss. If he files a motion to dismiss
and the complaint is dismissed, there will be no chance to invoke the counterclaim.
 There are cases where the law or rules itself provides that counterclaims are prohibited. Such as in expropriation cases
Kinds of counterclaims
1. Compulsory Counterclaims — one which, being cognizable by the regular courts of justice, arises out of or is connected with the
transaction or occurrence constituting the subject matter of the opposing party's claim
2. Permissive Counterclaims — those which are not compulsory counterclaims. There is an absence of a logical connection with
the subject matter of the complaint, i.e., it does not arise out of, or is not connected with the plaintiffs cause of action
 if the original complaint is dismissed, the counterclaim will stand on its own merits (Rule 17.2)
 There is no need for leave of court for a counterclaim.

Section 7: Kinds of Counterclaims

COMPULSORY COUNTERCLAIMS
 Such as — Exemplary damages, moral damages, attorney’s fees
 if the counterclaim exceeds the jurisdiction of the court where the main action is pending, the counterclaim is deemed
permissive
o Thus, a counterclaim for P500,000.00 in the Metropolitan Trial Court of Manila cannot be considered a compulsory
counterclaim since the amount exceeds the court’s jurisdiction even if assuming, it is intimately connected with the subject
matter of the complaint.  NOT to obtain affirmative relief BUT only to weaken the plaintiff’s claim
 A Compulsory Counterclaim be asserted in the ANSWER. If you don’t file a compulsory counterclaim in your answer, it is
deemed waived and barred forever. (but the rule is different in the case of permissive counterclaims)
RULE ON JURISDICTION OF COURT OVER COUNTERCLAIMS
1. In the RTC — there is no limit to the counterclaim.
2. In the MTC — the counterclaim is limited to the jurisdiction of the inferior court. If the amount counterclaim is beyond the
jurisdiction of the MTC, file it in the RTC as a separate action
PERMISSIVE COUNTERCLAIM
 most commonly treated feature of a permissive counterclaim is its absence of a logical connection with the subject matter of
the complaint, i.e., it does not arise out of, or is not connected with the plaintiffs cause of action
 REQUISITES —
1. Does NOT arise out of or is not necessarily connected with the transaction or occurrence that is the subject matter of the
opposing party’s claim;
2. It requires for its adjudication the presence of third parties of whom the court cannot acquire jurisdiction; and
3. Must be within the jurisdiction of the court, and is cognizable by the regular courts of justice

Section 8: Cross-Claim
CROSS-CLAIM
How should a Cross-Claim be asserted?
 A cross-claim that a party has at the time the answer is filed should be contained in said answer (R11, S8). This means that the
cross-claim must be set up in the same action.
 It has to be set up in the action because if not set up it shall be barred (R9, S2)
 BUT — If through oversight, inadvertence, or excusable negligence, it is not asserted, it may still be set up with leave of court, by
amendment of the pleadings
 a Cross-Claim CNNOT be asserted on appeal
 leave of court is NOT required for a Cross-Claim to be asserted  This is because crossclaims are against a person already a
party to the case, so the court already has jurisdiction over him

Section 9: Counter-Counterclaims and Counter-Cross-Claims

 This only applies to permissive counterclaims, because it would be useless to file a counterclaim against a compulsory
counterclaim since it would still pertain to the same transaction.
1. Counter-Counterclaim — A counterclaim may be asserted against an original counter-claimant.
2. Counter-Crossclaim — may be filed against an original cross-claimant.

Section 10: Reply

 It is filed by the plaintiff after the defendant files his answer
 It is the responsive pleading to an answer. It is not a responsive pleading to a counterclaim or a cross-claim. The proper
response to a counterclaim or a cross-claim is an answer to the counterclaim or answer to the cross-claim
 The proper function of a reply is to allege new matters in avoidance of any affirmative defense
 RULE — Filing a reply is NOT mandatory. Plaintiff is NOT prejudiced by not filing a reply. If there is no reply, all the new
matters alleged in the answer are deemed controverted.
 o Hence, if the answer to the complaint alleges as a defense the prescription of the action, the failure of the plaintiff to
specifically deny the prescription will not amount to an admission that the debt has prescribed because the rule already
denies the matter of prescription without the plaintiff making a specific denial. It is already, as the rule says, “deemed
controverted”
o Contrast this with the rule that the failure to specifically deny the material allegations of the complaint shall mean the
implied admission of such material allegations (R8, S11)
 EXCEPT — When the defense in the answer is based upon a written instrument or document, said instrument is considered
an actionable document, in this case, the plaintiff HAS TO file a reply if he desires to deny specifically the genuineness and
due execution of the actionable document and if he wants to avoid an admission of such matters
o The plaintiff must file a reply and specifically deny the genuine and due execution of the actionable document under oath,
otherwise, it will be deemed admitted.
o Rule 8, Sec. 8 provides, “The genuineness and due execution of the instrument shall be deemed admitted unless the adverse
party, under oath, specifically denies them, and sets forth what he claims to be the facts”

Section 11: Third-Party Complaint

 The defendant may implead another as third-party defendant —
1. On an allegation of liability of the latter to the defendant for contribution, indemnity, subrogation or any other relief
2. On the ground of direct liability of the third-party defendant to the plaintiff
3. The liability of the third-party defendant to both the plaintiff and the defendant.
 Summons still needed to obtain jurisdiction over the third-party defendant
 Third-party complaints are NOT allowed in appellate courts
 If the complaint is dismissed, the third-party complaint will also necessarily be dismissed.

Section 12: BRINGING NEW/NECESSARY PARTIES IN COUNTER-CLAIMS OR CROSS-CLAIMS

 Read this with R3, S8 and 9, this is the rule on joinder of necessary parties (But this is in original actions)
 What is the difference of Sec. 12 with third-party complaints?
o In a third party complaint, one of the third-party defendants is not a party to the main action.
o In this section, one or more of the defendants in a counterclaim or cross-claim is already a party to the action. They can be
brought as other necessary parties under this section.

Section 13: Answer to 3rd party complaint

 SEE codal
 Rule 7: Parts of a Pleading
Section 1: Caption
CONTENTS OF THE CAPTION
1. The name of the court
2. The title of the action
 Although the general rule requires the inclusion of the names of all the parties in the title of a complaint, the non-inclusion of
one or some of them is not fatal to the cause of action of a plaintiff, provided there is a statement in the body of the petition
indicating that a defendant was made a party to such action.
3. The docket number if assigned.
 Assigned once you pay the docket/filing fees

Section 2: Body
 SEE codal

Section 3: Signature other Formal Requirements of Pleadings

REQUIREMENTS OTHER THAN THE SIGNATURE
1. Address
o Counsel must also inform the court of his change of address
o In the absence of a proper notice to the court of a change of address, service upon the parties must be made at the last
address of their counsel of record
2. Roll Number
3. Counsel’s IBP Official Receipt Number indicating its date of issue.
4. Counsel’s Professional Tax Receipt Number (PTR)
5. MCLE Certificate of Compliance or Certificate of Exemption
6. Verification (when required, see sec. 4)
o These requirements pertaining to the counsel was meant to protect the public by making it easier to detect impostors who
represent themselves as members of the bar.
o Failure to comply with requirements may result to disciplinary actions such as contempt of court, and the pleadings be
stricken off.

Section 4: Verification
 The purpose of verification is simply to secure an assurance that the allegations of the petition (or complaint) have been made
in good faith; or are true and correct, not merely speculative.
 Indeed, verification is only a formal, not a jurisdictional requirement. (INC vs Ponferrada 2006)
 NOTE — Compare this with the rule on the requirement of a Certificate of Non-Forum Shopping which is required in all
complaints, petitions, applications, and other initiatory pleadings.
‣Examples of pleadings that require verification—
1. All pleadings filed in civil cases under the 1991 Revised Rules on Summary Procedure
2. Petition for review from the Regional Trial Court to the Supreme Court raising only questions of law under Rule 41, Section 2;
3. Petition for review of the decision of the Regional Trial Court to the Court of Appeals under Rule 42, Section 1
4. Petition for review from quasi-judicial bodies to the Court of Appeals under Rule 43, Section 5
5. Petition for review before the Supreme Court under Rule 45, Section 1
6. Petition for annulment of judgments or final orders and resolutions under Rule 47, Section 4
7. Complaint for injunction under Rule 58, Section 4
8. Application for preliminary injunction or temporary restraining order under Rule 58, Section 4
9. Application for appointment of a receiver under Rule 59, Section 1
10. Application for support pendente lite under Rule 61, Section 1
11. Petition for certiorari against the judgments, final orders or resolutions of constitutional commissions under Rule 64, Section 2
12. Petition for certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus under Rule 65 (in relation to Rule 46)
13. Petition for quo warranto under Rule 66, Section 1
14. Complaint for expropriation under Rule 67, Section 1
15. Petition for indirect contempt under Rule 71, Section 4, all from the 1997 Rules of Court
16. All complaints or petitions involving intra-corporate controversies under the Interim Rules of Procedure on Intra- Corporate
Controversies
17. Complaint or petition for rehabilitation and suspension of payment under the Interim Rules on Corporate Rehabilitation
18. Petition for declaration of absolute nullity of void marriages and annulment of voidable marriages as well as petition for
summary proceedings under the Family Code.
COMPLIANCE WITH THE VERTIFICATION REQUIREMENT
 It is the party who verifies the pleading, NOT the lawyer. Because it is he who knows the genuineness.
 EXCEPT — the lawyer can sign it under compelling reasons, Court has said this is substantial compliance as it is presumed that
facts alleged by him are true to his knowledge and belief (Santos vs CA 2001)
 NOTE — Under the rules on Alternative Dispute Resolution the lawyer can verify.
 if their are multiple parties, ALL of them must sign the verification
o EXCEPT — When they all share a communality of interest and invoke a common cause of action or defense, the signature
of only one of them will substantially comply with the rules. (INC vs Ponferrada 2006)
o Such as — in the cases of (1) co-owners, (2) spouses as to conjugal parties (3) beneficiaries of a family home with regard to
the family home
EFFECT OF LACK OF A VERIFICATION WHEN REQUIRED
 in the SC and CA, they dismiss without prejudice it for failure to comply with procedural requirements.
 In appeals there is also verification when required. In a sense it cannot anymore be cured if there is failure to verify because in
appealing, there is a reglementary period within which to file the appeal. If the party files an unverified pleading which is
required to be verified, it produces no legal effect, hence the period to appeal will lapse, and it cannot be cured anymore.

Section 5: CERTIFICATION AGAINST FORUM-SHOPPING (CERTIFICATE OF NON-FORUM SHOPPING)

 Forum shopping can be committed in three ways —
1. Litis pendencia - Filing multiple cases based on the same cause of action and with the same prayer, the previous case not
having been resolved yet (where the ground for dismissal is litis pendentia);
2. Res judicata — Filing multiple cases based on the same cause of action and the same prayer, the previous case having been
finally resolved (where the ground for dismissal is res judicata); and
3. Splitting of causes of action — Filing multiple cases based on the same cause of action, but with different prayers (splitting
of causes of action, where the ground for dismissal is also either litis pendentia or res judicata).
 The test is to see whether in the two or more cases pending, there is —
1. Identity of parties
2. Identity of rights or causes of action, and
3. Identity of reliefs sought
 RULE — A certificate of non-forum shopping is required in every initiatory pleading
o This includes also special civil actions
 BUT — It is NOT needed in every motion NOR required in a compulsory counterclaim
o An answer is not an initiatory pleading which requires a certification against forum shopping
SIGNATURE ON THE CERTIFICATE OF NON-FORUM SHOPPING (WHO SIGNS IT?)
1. FOR NATURAL PERSONS — THE CERTIFICATE MUST BE SIGNED BY THE PARTY HIMSELF, NOT THE COUNSEL
 RATIONALE — The reason for requiring that it must be signed by the principal party himself is that he has actual knowledge, or
knows better than anyone else, whether he has initiated similar action/s in other courts, agencies or tribunals.
2. FOR MULTIPLE PARTIES — THEY ALL HAVE TO SIGN
 EXCEPT — When they all share a communality of interest and invoke a common cause of action or defense, the signature of only
one of them will substantially comply with the rules. (INC vs Ponferrada 2006)
3. FOR JURIDICAL PERSONS — SIGNATURE MAY BE DONE EITHER BY —
a. A person authorized by a board resolution embodied in a secretary's certificate — which authorizes an officer OR the
corporation’s counsel, who has personal knowledge of the facts attested to in the certificate, to sign for it.
1) A specifically authorized lawyer — who has personal knowledge of the facts required to be disclosed in such document.
2) Individuals vested with authority by a valid board resolution — may sign the certificate of non-forum shopping on behalf
of a corporation and proof of such authority. (The petition is subject to dismissal if a certification was submitted
unaccompanied by proof of the signatory's authority.)
b. Certain corporate officers, even without a board resolution
1) The Chairperson of the Board of Directors
2) The President of a corporation
3) The General Manager or Acting General Manager
4) Personnel Officer
5) Employment Specialist in a labor case.
4. FOR FOREIGN CORPORATIONS
 SALVADOR — a managing director’s certificate will do, or whatever their own laws consider the equivalent of a secretary’s
certificate.
FAILURE
 It is not jurisdictional, it must be raised at the earliest opportunity (NOT on appeal) otherwise, it is deemed waived
 A complaint is filed for and in behalf of the plaintiff who is not authorized to do so, the complaint is not deemed filed. An
unauthorized complaint does not produce any legal effect. Hence, the court should dismiss the complaint on the ground that
it has no jurisdiction over the complaint and the plaintiff.
 Since the court has no jurisdiction over the complaint and respondent, petitioner is not estopped from challenging the trial
court's jurisdiction, even at the pre-trial stage of the proceedings. This is so because the issue of jurisdiction may be raised at
any stage of the proceedings, even on appeal, and is not lost by waiver or by estoppel.
 EXCEPT — WHEN THERE IS SUBSTANTIAL OR SUBSEQUENT COMPLIANCE COUPLED WITH THE PRESENCE OF SPECIAL
CIRCUMSTANCES OR COMPELLING REASONS, THE CASE MAY PROCEED. (filing officer of corporation did not attach document
showing authority then subsequent compliance; when board later on granted authority and court allowed to prevent re-
litigation as the case was already decided by the lower courts)
 Rule 8: Manner of Making Allegations in Pleadings
Section 1: WHAT A PLEADING SHOULD GENERALLY CONTAIN
 The ultimate facts refer to the essential facts of the claim. A fact is essential if it cannot be stricken out without leaving the
statement of the cause of action inadequate

Section 2: ALTERNATIVE CAUSES OF ACTION OR DEFENSES

 Example — Action for specific performance and rescission can be alternative reliefs to a breach of contract
 The plaintiff may, for example, believe that the liability of the carrier may be based either on a breach of contract of carriage or
on a quasi-delict, but he may not be certain which of the causes of action would squarely fit the set of facts alleged in the
complaint, although he is certain that he is entitled to relief. He may therefore, state his causes of action in the alternative.
ALTERNATIVE CLAIMS BY PLAINTIFF
 What is the plaintiff’s remedy in cases where facts, essential to the plaintiff’s cause of action, are within the knowledge of the
defendant, but of which the plaintiff is so imperfectly informed that he cannot state with certainty, even on information or
belief?
o The plaintiff may state the facts within his knowledge with certainty, but to plead in the ALTERNATIVE the doubtful facts
which are wholly within the defendant’s knowledge, and call upon the defendant to make the full disclosure of the facts.
ALTERNATIVE DEFENSES BY DEFENDANT
 RULE — Defendant has the right to set up negative defense in one cause of action and affirmative defense in another in the
same action.

Section 3: Conditions Precedent

 RULE — WHEN A CLAIM IS SUBJECT TO A CONDITION PRECEDENT, THE COMPLIANCE OF THE SAME MUST BE ALLEGED IN THE
PLEADING
 Such as —
1) Barangay conciliation process
2) A tender of payment is required before making a consignation
3) Exhaustion of administrative remedies
4) Earnest efforts toward a compromise must be undertaken when the suit is between members of the same family
5) Arbitration may be a condition precedent when the contract between the parties provides for arbitration first before
recourse to judicial remedies.
 NOTE — The failure to comply with a condition precedent is an independent ground for a motion to dismiss — “that a condition
precedent for filing the claim has not been complied with”

Section 4: Capacity
 NOTE — Remember that lack of capacity to sue or be sued is a ground for dismissal, either on the grounds of the “plaintiff has
no capacity to sue” or “the complaint states no cause of action” if the defendant has no capacity to be sued.
1. If the defendant wishes to raise an issue as to the plaintiff’s legal capacity to sue — He may file a motion to dismiss on
that ground, or set it up as an affirmative defense in the answer.
2. If the defendant wishes to raise an issue as to his legal capacity to be sued — He may question the jurisdiction of the court
over his person.

Section 5: PLEADING INVOLVING FRAUD, MISTAKE, OR CONDITION OF THE MIND

 The complaint must state with particularity the fraudulent acts of the adverse party.
 The failure to specifically allege the fraudulent acts does not constitute a ground for dismissal since such defect can be cured by
a bill of particulars. But, in cases governed by the Interim Rules of Procedure on Intra-Corporate Controversies, however, a bill
of particulars is a prohibited pleading. It is essential, therefore, for the complaint to show on its face what are claimed to be the
fraudulent corporate acts if the complainant wishes to invoke the courts special commercial jurisdiction. (Reyes vs RTC of
Makati 2008)
 Malice, intent, knowledge or other condition of the mind may be averred generally. The rule is borne out of human experience.
It is difficult to state the particulars constituting these matters. Hence, a general averment is sufficient.

Section 6: PLEADING A JUDGMENT, OR DECISION

 Under R131, S3, there is a presumption, though disputable, that “a court or judge acting as such, whether in the Philippines or
elsewhere, was acting in the lawful exercise of jurisdiction.

Section 7 & 8: ACTION OR DEFENSE BASED ON A WRITTEN INSTRUMENT OR DOCUMENT

 Examples of Actionable Documents —
 1. In an action for collection of a sum of money, the actionable document would be the promissory note executed by the
defendant in favor of the plaintiff.
2. In an action for foreclosure of a mortgage, the actionable document would be the deed of mortgage.
3. On the other hand, if the defendant alleges that the debt has been paid, the receipt of payment issued by the plaintiff would
be the actionable document.
 BUT — he does NOT admit (Defenses NOT cut-off despite the implied admission of the genuineness and due execution of the
document) —
1) The true nature or true intention
2) Payment or non-payment
3) Want of consideration
4) Illegality of consideration
5) Usury
6) Fraud
7) Mistake
8) Compromise
9) Prescription
10) Estoppel
 These defenses are NOT inconsistent with the admission of the genuineness and due execution of the instrument and are not
therefore, barred. For example, in fraudulent misrepresentation, you admit that your signature is genuine but you can contest
“why” you signed the document.

Section 9: PLEADING AN OFFICIAL DOCUMENT OR ACT

 SEE codal

Section 10 & 11: SPECIFIC DENIAL

KINDS OF SPECIFIC DENIAL
1. ABSOLUTE DENIAL
Example — “Defendant denies the truth of the allegations in par. 7 of the complaint alleging that he owes the plaintiff P450,000.00,
the truth of the matter being that it is the Plaintiff who owes the defendant the same amount.”
2. PARTIAL/QUALIFIED DENIAL
‣Example — In an action for damages, the defendant avers: “Defendant admits the allegations in paragraph 5 of the complaint, that
Plaintiff sustained injuries when his car collided with the herein Defendant’s car, but denies the allegation that the collision occurred
through Defendant’s fault.”
3. DISAVOWAL OF KNOWLEDGE
‣Example — Plaintiff alleges that he suffered besmirched reputation and sleepless nights and thus, claims moral damages, the
defendant can claim disavowal of knowledge because he cannot possibly know of whether this is true or not. Also, for exemplary
damages and attorney’s fees.
 Defenses of “lack of knowledge” for “lack of privity” or “inability to recall because it happened a long time ago” are insufficient
defences
NEGATIVE PREGNANT
 A negative pregnant does not qualify as a specific denial. It is conceded to be actually an admission
 In a pleading, it is a negative implying also an affirmative and which although is stated in a negative form really admits the
allegations to which it relates
 Example — A complaint alleges: “Plaintiff extended a loan to Defendant in the amount of P500,000 on July 27, 2006 in Baguio
City.” The defendant in his answer alleges: “Defendant specifically denies that Plaintiff extended a loan to Defendant in the
amount of P500,000 on July 27, 2006 in Baguio City.”
 The answer is a mere repetition of the allegations made in the complaint. The answer is vague as to what it really denies. Is it
the existence of a loan that is denied? Is it the amount? The date? The place? The effect of this kind of denial is an admission.
CONSEQUENCES WHEN ALLEGATIONS ARE NOT SPECIFICALLY DENIED
 RULE — MATERIAL AVERMENTS IN THE COMPLAINT SHALL BE DEEMED ADMITTED WHEN NOT SPECIFICALLY DENIED
 EXCEPT — The following are nonetheless NOT admitted even if they are not specifically denied —
1) The amount of unliquidated damages
2) Immaterial averments (allegations by way of anticipation of defense or conclusions of law)

Section 12: STRIKING OUT OF PLEADING OR MATTER CONTAINED THEREIN

 SEE codal
 Rule 10: Amended and Supplemental Pleadings
Section 1: Amendment of Pleadings
 Amendments are proper in order to allege facts which occurred prior to the filing of the original pleadings, but which for some
reason, such as oversight, inadvertence, or subsequent discovery, were not alleged therein
 NOTE — Compare this with Supplemental Pleadings which are proper in order to allege facts which occurred AFTER the filing of
the original pleadings.
 The courts should be liberal in allowing amendments to pleadings to avoid a multiplicity of suits and in order that the real
controversies between the parties are presented, their rights determined, and the case decided on the merits without
unnecessary delay. This liberality is greatest in the early stages of a lawsuit.

Section 2: Amendments a Matter of Right

 All you need is a “notice to amend”. You can amend both in form or substance.
 Sec. 2 refers to an amendment made before the trial court, not to amendments before the Court of Appeals. The Court of
Appeals is vested with discretion to admit or deny amended petitions filed before it
 A motion to dismiss is NOT a responsive pleading. If a motion to dismiss is filed, an amendment to the complaint would still be a
matter of right during the pendency of the motion to dismiss.
 What is a motion to dismiss was granted by the trial court, can the plaintiff still amend his complaint?
o YES if the dismissal is not yet final. The plaintiff may file an amended complaint even after the original complaint was
ordered dismissed if the order is not yet final and the amendment is before the answer.
 A party’s remedy when the Court refuses to admit amendment as a matter of right is mandamus
 Can the amendment of pleadings cover a substantial changes or alterations in the cause of action?
o YES, provided that the original cause of action existed at the time the complaint was filed. In this case, the amendment can
still be a matter of right or with leave of court, depending on whether a responsive pleading has been filed or not
 Is an amendment which substantially changes the cause of action considered a new action?
o YES.

Section 3: Amendment with Leave of Court

 SEE codal

Section 4: Formal Amendments

 In summary, what are the instances when the court, in its own instance, may order an amendment?
1. In pleadings in general — the court can order mere formal amendments
2. In case a bill of particulars is filed — the court can either order compliance or an amendment
3. In case a motion to dismiss is filed — the court can either grant, deny, or order an amendment
4. In criminal case, in case a motion to quash is filed — the court can grant, deny or order an amendment.

Section 5: Amendment to Conform to or Authorize Presentation of Evidence

CASES WHERE THE PARTIES GO BEYOND THE ISSUES PRESENTED IN THE PLEADINGS
1. NO OBJECTION- IF NO OBJECTION BY THE PARTIES (THERE IS EXPRESS OR IMPLIED CONSENT OF THE PARTIES)
o How can one not-object, impliedly?
 By cross-examining or by providing evidence in contra
o Example — Where the pleadings of the parties disclose that the only issue presented before the court is merely the right of
ownership over a certain property, any evidence to show right to possession may be objected to as irrelevant to the issue of
the case, the concept of ownership being different from the concept of possession.
2. OBJECTION INTERPOSED- IF THE OTHER PARTY OBJECTS (IF EVIDENCE IS OBJECTED TO AT THE TRIAL ON THE GROUND THAT IT
IS NOT WITHIN THE ISSUES MADE BY THE PLEADINGS)
o RULE — The amendment is left to the sound discretion of the court.
o So, in order for the objecting party to successfully oppose the amendment, he must prove that he will be prejudiced (either
in his action or in his defense)
AMENDMENT TO CURE THE LACK OF A CAUSE OF ACTION AT THE TIME THE COMPLAINT IS FILED
 If the complaint does NOT really have a cause of action, then Sec. 5 does NOT apply. That cannot be cured
 For example, if a complaint failed to allege the fulfillment of a condition precedent upon which the cause of action depends,
evidence showing that such condition had already been fulfilled when the complaint was filed may be presented during the trial,
and the complaint may accordingly be amended thereafter.
 NOTE — Remember the rule in Rule 2, Sec. 1 that every ordinary civil action must be based on a cause of action and
such must necessarily exist at the time the complaint is filed.
Example — Filing a suit for collection when the loan is not yet due and demandable, the defect cannot be cured even if
the loan has now matured
AMENDMENT TO CORRECT A JURISDICTIONAL DEFECT
 When after the amendment the court will not have J, then the court cannot act on the amendment.
 Example — In an action for damages filed before the RTC against a sheriff for an alleged illegal levy upon the property of the
plaintiff, the latter sought to amend his complaint after an answer has been served by the defendant. The amendment was made
when the plaintiff realized that the amount alleged as damages was below the jurisdiction of the court. The Supreme Court held
that it was error to admit the amendment because the court must first acquire jurisdiction over the subject matter of the
complaint in order to act validly on the same including its amendment
 Is an amendment alleging compliance with a condition precedent a jurisdictional defect?
o NO. The failure of a party to comply with a condition precedent is not a jurisdictional defect. Such defect does not place the
controversy beyond the courts power to resolve. If a party fails to raise such defect in a motion to dismiss, such defect is
deemed waived.

Section 6: Supplemental Readings

 Supplemental Pleadings can be amended, but with leave of court also
 What if the cause of action in the supplemental complaint is different from the cause of action mentioned in the original
complaint?
o RULE — Court should NOT admit the supplemental complaint

Supplemental Pleadings Amendment of Pleadings

When the facts to be
alleged happened
Requirement of Leave of
Court
Transactions, occurrences or events which
have happened AFTER the date of the
pleading sought to be supplemented.
Always with leave of court
Omission of a fact that happened BEFORE filing; it
was there at the time of the pleading
It may be filed without leave of court (if to be done
before service responsive pleading or within 10 days
after filing of reply)

Section 7: Procedure to Amend Pleadings

‣NOTE — It should first be served on the defendant

Section 8: Effect of Amended Pleadings

RESPONSE TO AN AMENDED COMPLAINT
 RULE — AN ANSWER EARLIER FILED MAY SERVE AS THE ANSWER TO THE AMENDED COMPLAINT IF NO NEW ANSWER IS FILED
(R11, S3)
 Is summons still required to be served again when the Complaint has been amended?
o NO. Unless it has not been previously served.
o A court’s jurisdiction continues until the case is finally terminated once it is acquired.
o BUT — when the defendants have not yet appeared in court, new summons on the amended complaint must be served
on them.

Rule 11: When to file a Responsive Pleading: SEE Codal