1997 Rules on Civil Procedure 2001 Edition

Rule 01 GENERAL PROVISIONS

Rule 01 General Provisions

SECTION 1. Title of the Rules. These Rules shall be known and cited as the Rules of Court. SEC. 2. In what courts applicable. These Rules shall apply in all the courts, except as otherwise provided by the Supreme Court. Section 1 provides the title of the Rule Rules of Court. And Section 2, these rules shall apply in all the courts except as otherwise provided by the Supreme Court. Meaning, applicable to all courts except when the SC say otherwise. For example: The SUMMARY RULES on procedure which is applicable to some cases in the MTC. Another example of when the SC say otherwise is Section 4 that the rules shall not apply to election cases, land registration, cadastral, naturalization, insolvency proceedings and other cases not herein provided for except by analogy. That is formerly Rule 143. Ngayon nilagay nila sa umpisa. The placement is better so that we will see it immediately. That is actually not a new provision. Thats an old one. It used to be in Rule 143, now it is in Rule 1. Sec. 3. Cases governed. These Rules shall govern the procedure to be observed in actions, civil or criminal, and special proceedings. x x x x x x Now, some people are asking me, Akala ko ba civil procedure ito, bakit merong criminal? How come it mentions criminal cases and definitions when it is supposed to be 1997 Rules on Civil Procedure? NO, Rule 1 is the general provision for the entire Rules of Court. You look at the title, These rules shall be known as the Rules of Court. This is the common denominator from the first to the last Rule. Thats why it says there special proceedings, civil cases and criminal cases. Now we are not interested in criminal cases of course. Civil action na lang tayo muna. x x x x x (a) A civil action is one by which a party sues another for the enforcement or protection of a right, or the prevention or redress of a wrong. A civil action may either be ordinary or special. Both are governed by the rules for ordinary civil actions, subject to the specific rules prescribed for a special civil action. x x x x x Well the definition of a civil action is there. The definition now becomes shorter compared to the previous definition. Its the same definition. It has only been shortened.

Property of LAKAS ATENISTA

52

1997 Rules on Civil Procedure 2001 Edition

Rule 01 General Provisions

A CIVIL ACTION is one by which a party sues another for the enforcement or protection of a right, or the prevention or redress of a wrong. So, that is the purpose of a civil suit to enforce or protect your right or you sue somebody for the purpose of preventing or redressing a wrong. CLASSIFICATION OF CIVIL ACTIONS Q: Classify civil actions. A: The following: I. As to NATURE (Section 3 [a]) a.) Ordinary Civil Actions b.) Special Civil Actions As to CAUSE or FOUNDATION: a.) Real Actions b.) Personal Actions c.) Mixed Actions As to PLACE OF FILING a.) Local Actions b.) Transitory Actions

II.

III.

IV.

a.) Action In Personam b.) Action In Rem c.) Action Quasi In Rem
I. CIVIL ACTION; CLASSIFICATION AS TO NATURE ORDINARY CIVIL ACTIONS and SPECIAL CIVIL ACTIONS

As to OBJECT

The special civil actions are governed by Rules 62 to 71. And the actions not among those mentioned is automatically ordinary. And even at this stage, you should be able to give already what. are the special civil actions. So, it is a matter of looking at the table of contents. Rules 62 to 71: Interpleader, Declaratory Relief, Certiorari, Pr ohibition, Mandamus, Quo Warranto, Expropriation, Foreclosure of Mortgage, Partition, Forcible Entry, Unlawful Detainer and Contempt. There is a new one Review of Final Decisions or Resolutions of the COMELEC and COA under Rule 64. But actually it says there, it is governed by Rule 65. So in other words Certiorari (Rule 65) pa rin although its a new rule now. Rule 64 is entitled Review of Decisions of the COMELEC and the COA, but it shall he governed by Rule 65 on Certiorari . Q: What is so important in distinguishing a special civil action from an ordinary civil action? A: What makes an action special is simply because of the fact that there are some specific rules prescribed for them which are not found in other rules. But to say that the rules on ordinary civil

Property of LAKAS ATENISTA

53

1997 Rules on Civil Procedure 2001 Edition

Rule 01 General Provisions

actions do not apply to special civil actions is false. The law is very clear. Both are governed by the rules on ordinary civil actions subject to the specific rules. Therefore, in case of conflict between the specific rule governing a particular type of civil action and the ordinary, then you follow the specific provision. But if the rules on special civil actions are silent, apply the ordinary rules. Give an example of a case where in the absence of a special provision in the rules on special civil actions the court had to apply the rules on ordinary civil actions by analogy. The case of AMBERTI vs. COURT OF APPEALS 195 SCRA 659 [1991] FACTS: This case involved a petition for certiorari (special civil action under Rule 65) and then before the respondent could answer the petition, he withdrew the petition. And then later on he changed his mind. He re-filed the petition. The question that was asked by the SC is when you file a special civil action for certiorari and then before the other party could answer you withdraw it, is the withdrawal with or without prejudice? Can you re-file it? There is no rule in Rule 65 answering that question so the SC had to resort to the ordinary rules by analogy. HELD: Certiorari is similar to appeal although it is not really an appeal. And the SC looked at the law on appeal. What happens when you perfect your appeal and then later on you withdraw your appeal? What will happen to the order or judgment? Rule 50 says that if you withdraw the appeal, the judgment appealed from will now become final and executory. Therefore, since it is now final and executory, you cannot change it anymore. Applying the foregoing rules in a supplementary manner (or by analogy), upon the withdrawal of a petition in a special civil action before the answer or comment thereto has been filed, the case shall stand as though no appeal has been taken, so that the judgment or order of the lower court being questioned becomes immediately final and executory. Thus, a resolution granting the withdrawal of such a petition is with prejudice and petitioner is precluded from bringing a second action based on the same subject matter. So thats a perfect example of the application of ordinary rules in special civil actions. Now, there are other classifications of civil actions which are not expressly stated in Section 3. The only one stated there is ordinary and special. II. CIVIL ACTIONS; CLASSIFICATION AS TO CAUSE OF FOUNDATION: REAL, PERSONAL or MIXED ACTIONS An action is either a real or personal action. And that is important because of Rule 4 the venue for real actions is different from the venue for personal actions. A REAL ACTION is briefly described as an action where the issue or the subject involved is title, ownership, possession or interest over a real property like accion publiciana, forcible entry, unlawful

Property of LAKAS ATENISTA

54

1997 Rules on Civil Procedure 2001 Edition

Rule 01 General Provisions

detainer, foreclosure of mortgage or real property, partition of real property. (c.f. Section 19, BP 129 controversy relates to real property) On the other hand, when the issue is not one of those meaning, it is founded on privity of contract, or on quasi-delict, such as actions for a sum of money, or damages, for the enforcement or resolution of a contract, or for recovery of personal property, these are the PERSONAL ACTIONS. (Casilan vs. Tomassi, 90 Phil. 765; Cachero vs. Manila Yellow Taxicab, 101 Phil. 523; Bautista vs. Piguing, L-10006, Oct. 31, 1957) Some textwriters give a third classification: the MIXED ACTIONS where there is a mixture of real and personal actions. Mixed actions are such as pertain in some degree to both real and personal and, therefore, are properly reducible to neither of them, being brought for the specific recovery of land and for damages sustained in respect of such land. (Dela Cruz vs. Seminary of Manila, 18 P{hil. 330) Like an action for recovery of a piece of land with damages. So thats a mixed action. Although it is more of real rather than personal. If the damage is only incidental, then it is more of a real action rather than a personal action like the case of TACAY. The claim for damages is incidental, the main purpose is recovery of possession of land. III. CIVIL ACTIONS; CLASSIFICATION AS TO THE PLACE OF FILING: LOCAL ACTIONS and TRANSITORY ACTIONS A LOCAL ACTIONS is an action which can only be instituted in a particular place whereas a personal action follows the residence of the parties. Good examples of local actions are real actions. Real actions are also automatically local actions. They can only be instituted in the place where the property is situated. This is already provided by law (e.g. accion publiciana, forcible entry, unlawful detainer can only be filed where the land is situated.) TRANSITORY ACTIONS are those which follow the party wherever he may reside. (1 Am. Jur. 430) Personal actions are transitory it is based on where the plaintiff or where the defendant resides at the option or election of the plaintiff. It is based on the residence of the parties. We will go to the fourth classification as to object of the suit. IV. CIVIL ACTIONS; CLASSIFICATION AS TO OBJECT: ACTIONS IN PERSONAM, IN REM and QUASI IN REM ACTIONS IN PERSONAM vs. ACTIONS IN REM How do we differentiate one from the other? The SC in the past has given the definition in some cases which definition appears in many books as quoted by authors. But the trouble with these definitions, sometimes, the more you read it the more you dont understand what the definition is all about. For example: If the technical object of the suit is to establish a claim generally against some particular persons, with a judgment which, in theory, at least, binds his body. or to bar

Property of LAKAS ATENISTA

55

1997 Rules on Civil Procedure 2001 Edition

Rule 01 General Provisions

some individual claim or objection, so that only certain persons are entitled to be heard, the action is IN PERSONAM. (Grey Alba vs. Dela Cruz, 17 Phil. 49; Sandejas vs. Robles, 81 Phil. 421) But, if the object of the suit is to bar indifferently all who might be minded to make an objection of any sort against the rights sought to be established, and if anyone in the world has a right to be heard on the strength of alleging facts which, if true, show an inconsistent interest, the action is IN REM. (Grey Alba vs. Dela Cruz, 17 Phil. 49; Sandejas vs. Robles, 81 Phil. 421) To simplify the definition: ACTION IN PERSONAM any judgment that the court will render in that case binds only the parties to the action and their privies or their successors-in-interest. ACTION IN REM any judgment with the court will render in the case binds not only the parties to the case but the whole world, then the action is in rem. To follow the language of the SC in the case of: CHING vs. COURT OF APPEALS 181 SCRA 9 HELD: Actions in personam and actions in rem differ in that the former are directed against specific persons and seek personal judgments, while the latter are directed against the thing or property or status of a person and seek judgments with respect thereto as against the whole world. Action in personam; EXAMPLE: ILLUSTRATION: Recovery of land, accion publiciana: Momma Jessa vs. Little Lulu. Sabi ng court: Alright Momma Jessa, you are the winner and you are entitled to the land. Now, here comes Baby Maya. Momma Jessa says, Wala na iyan, tapos na iyan. In the case, that was already decided that I am entitled. Sabi ni Baby Maya, Ah, that is between you (Momma Jessa) and Little Lulu. But Im different. I have evidence to prove that my right is better than yours. I am not bound by that decision. Q: Is the judgment rendered in the case between Momma Jessa and Little Lulu binding on Baby Maya? A: NO, because Baby Maya is not a party to that case. She cannot be bound by a judgment where she is not a party. Hence, the action between Momma Jessa and Little Lulu is an action in personam. Action in Rem; Example: ILLUSTRATION #1: Action for annulment of marriage or declaration of nullity of marriage. Suppose the husband (Joshua) files a case against his wife (Tekla) to annul their marriage. After trial, the court rendered judgment annulling the marriage of Joshua and Tekla. It became final. Now, the status of the parties is SINGLE na naman because the marriage is annulled. Joshua meets

Property of LAKAS ATENISTA

56

1997 Rules on Civil Procedure 2001 Edition

Rule 01 General Provisions

another girl, Maying, and courted her and told Maying, I would like to marry you. Maying said, I cannot marry you because I know you are married. How can I marry you when you are already married? Joshua said, Not anymore. Im no longer married because my marriage with Tekla is already annulled and here is the decision. So, Im single. According Maying, No, I am not bound by that judgment because I was not a party to that case. Q: When the court ruled in the case between Joshua and Tekla that the marriage is annulled and that now you are single, is the judgment binding on anybody? A: YES. Your status is single and whether you are a party in the case or not, you are bound by the judgment because it is directed against the whole world. Your status is to be respected. ILLUSTRATION #2: When a son, Carlo the Spokes, files a case against the father, Rod the Tenor ( most outstanding student of Pavarotti ), to be considered a recognized child and the court said, Yes, you are declared a child of the defendant, Rod the Tenor is now compelled to recognize you. Your status as a recognized child is not only binding on your father but is binding on the whole world. Your status is no longer unrecognized. Take note, an action in rem and in personam have often been confused with the classification of real and personal action. They sound almost the same. That an action in personam is also a personal action, or, when an action is in rem it is also a real action it is not true. That is a different classification. An action could be as to cause it could be real. As to object, it could be in personam. In the same manner, it could be personal action but an action in rem. So, these are two different classification. ILLUSTRATION: Eugenia files a case against Concon to recover the possession of a piece of land. It is a REAL action. In real action, the subject is possession or ownership of real property. Any judgment therein binds only the parties, and not the whole world. So, it is also an action IN PERSONAM. It is a real action as to cause, but as to object, it is in personam. ILLUSTRATION: Papa Paul filed a case to annul his marriage with his wife. It is a PERSONAL action because it does not involved his property. It is about status. But it is also IN REM because the judgment therein is binding the whole world. So, magka-iba yan!!! As a matter of fact, it is not only students but even lawyers and judges interchange one with the other. Last year, I was reading the SCRA, I cannot remember the decision where before deciding, the SC gave a lecture: The trouble with this case, the basic error of the court is that it confused real action with an action in rem and an action in personam with a personal action a real action could be in personam and a personal action could be in rem. So do not be confused. QUASI IN REM Text writers gave a sort of third classification as to object. This is called action quasi in rem. QUASI means almost. So, quasi in rem is almost in rem. Actually, it is in personam but almost in rem. Q: Define action quasi in rem.

Property of LAKAS ATENISTA

57

1997 Rules on Civil Procedure 2001 Edition

Rule 01 General Provisions

A: An action quasi in rem is actually in personam because it is directed only against a particular individual but the purpose of the proceeding is to subject his property to the obligation of lien burdening it. The object of the case is the sale or other disposition of property of the defendant over which you have a right or lien over the property. EXAMPLE: Foreclosure of Mortgage. Somebody borrows money from you and mortgages his land as security for the loan. Then later, he cannot pay. You decide to institute foreclosure proceedings over the mortgage property. I presume you know the object of the foreclosure. If the property is foreclosed, the property over which you have a lien a right because it is mortgaged to you that property will be sold at public auction and the proceeds will be given to the mortgagee or creditor in payment of the obligation. ILLUSTRATION: An action to foreclose a mortgage is the best example of a civil action quasi in rem because there is a defendant (mortgagor) and the object of the case is to have the property mortgaged sold or disposed of in order to satisfy the mortgage lien of the mortgagee. It is in personam because it is directed only against person who mortgaged to you. But once the property is foreclosed, practically everybody has to respect it. Wala ka ng right doon sa property. Naunahan ka na. Thats why it is called quasi in rem. Or, to borrow the language of the SC in simplifying the term quasi in rem, quasi in rem means against the person in respect to the res, against the mortgagor in respect to the thing mortgaged. CIVIL ACTIONS vs. SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS Q: Define a special proceeding. A: Rule 1, Section 3 [c]: c) A special proceeding is a remedy by which a party establish a status, a right, or a particular fact. (2a, R2) seeks to

Special proceedings should not be confused with a civil action. Special Proceedings are governed by Rules 72-109 of the Rules of Court. You look at the table of contents and you will see them. That is a third year subject. BAR QUESTION: Distinguish a civil action from a special proceeding. A: The following:

1.) A CIVIL ACTION is one by which a party sues another for the enforcement or protection of
a right, or the prevention or redress of a wrong, whereas, A SPECIAL PROCEEDING is a remedy by which a party seeks to establish a status, a right, or a particular fact;

2.) In a civil action, there are two (2) definite and particular adverse parties, the party who
demands a right, called a plaintiff, and the other whom the right is sought, called a defendant, whereas, In a SPECIAL PROCEEDING, while there is a definite party petitioner, there is no definite adverse party as the proceeding is usually considered to be against the whole world;

Property of LAKAS ATENISTA

58

1997 Rules on Civil Procedure 2001 Edition

3.) A CIVIL ACTION requires the filing of formal pleadings, whereas

Rule 01 General Provisions

In a SPECIAL PROCEEDING, relief may be obtained by mere application or petition;

4.) The period to appeal in CIVIL ACTIONS is generally 15 days and the requirement is the
filing of a notice of appeal, whereas In SPECIAL PROCEEDINGS the period to appeal is 30 days and aside from notice of appeal, the law requires the filing of a record on appeal. Of course the basic distinction is found in Section 3 a civil action is one by which a party sues another for the enforcement or protection of a right, or the prevention or redress of a wrong. Whereas, a special proceeding is a remedy by which a party seeks to establish a status, a right, or a particular fact. The object of a civil action is to enforce or protect a right or to prevent or redress a wrong. But the object of a special proceeding is only to establish a status, a right or a particular fact. If a creditor sues the debtor to collect an unpaid loan, is that a civil action or a special proceeding? That is a civil action because the creditor wants to enforce or protect his right to collect. The creditor is compelling the debtor to pay. It is adversarial. A good example of a special proceeding is a petition for ADOPTION. It is a special proceeding because the purpose is to establish a status of parents and child who were not related to each other. In other words, to create a relation of parents and child under the law between two people. The procedure in the law of adoption will be studied in the subject on special proceedings. There was one article which I read about adoption. This is how the author describes adoption: Adoption is one of the sacred mysteries of the law. It concerns the making of a natural person as a legitimate child of another person without the intervention of sex. A man becomes a father of the child he did not sire. A woman becomes the mother of a child she did not bear. It is through the magic or fiction of the law that adopters become parents of children unrelated to them by blood, or if related, the relationship is one of illegitimacy. So you can adopt you own illegitimate child for the purpose of improving his status. So, when you file a petition for adoption, you are not suing somebody to enforce or protect a right or prevent or redress a wrong. The purpose is to create a status of parent and child between 2 people who are not related to each other. And when you file a petition for adoption, you are not filing a case against anybody. Wala ka namang kalaban, eh. There is a petitioner, the one who files, but there is no definite party. But it is directed against the whole world because once the adoption is granted, then, as far as the whole world is concerned, they have to respect the status that this is now your child. Kaya nga, it is in rem. Generally, special proceedings are in rem.

Property of LAKAS ATENISTA

59

1997 Rules on Civil Procedure 2001 Edition

Rule 01 General Provisions

But since it is directed against the whole world, anyone in the world can come forward and oppose the petition. Kaya nga may publication. You go to court and file your opposition. So wala kang kalaban na particular person but in reality, anybody in the world can come forward and oppose it. That's the difference between a special proceeding and a civil action. Sec. 4. In what cases not applicable. - These Rules shall not apply to election cases, land registration, cadastral, naturalization and insolvency proceedings, and other cases not herein provided for, except by analogy or in a suppletory character and whenever practicable and convenient. (R143a) The Rules of Court do not apply to certain proceedings in court. A good example is Section 2 these rules shall apply in all the courts except as otherwise provided by the SC. Q: What court proceedings where the Rules of Court are not applicable? A: Election cases, land registration cases, cadastral cases, naturalization cases, insolvency proceedings, and other cases not herein provided for except by analogy of for suppletory purposes. In these cases, the Rules of Court are suppletory in character. In case of conflict between election law and the Rules of Court, forget the Rules of Court. But when the Election Code is silent, you apply the Rules of Court by analogy or for suppletory purposes. There are some election cases which fall within the jurisdiction of the courts, not necessarily COMELEC. For example, violation of election code where the party may be adjudged to go to jail. That is a criminal case. That is governed by the rules on criminal procedure. It is more on imprisonment. Sec. 5. Commencement of an action. - A civil action is commenced by the filing of the original complaint in court. If an additional defendant is impleaded in a later pleading, the action is commenced with regard to him on the date of the filing of such later pleading, irrespective of whether the motion for its admission, if necessary, is denied by the court. (6a) Q: When is a court action deemed commenced? A: A civil action is commenced by the filing of the original complaint in court . Of course this is not really complete. The filing of the original complaint in court must be accompanied by the payment of the correct docket fee. A complaint is not deemed filed until the docket fee is paid. This is important to determine the exact date that the action has commenced because it is from that moment that the running of the prescriptive period is interrupted. The second sentence of Section 5 states that, If an additional defendant is impleaded in a later pleading, the action is commenced with regard to him on the date of the filing of such later pleading

Property of LAKAS ATENISTA

60

1997 Rules on Civil Procedure 2001 Edition

Rule 01 General Provisions

Example: Today (November 19, 1997), I filed a complaint against A. So, the action is commenced on Nov. 19, 1997. However next month, say, December 19, if there is an additional defendant, the date of the commencement of the action with regards to the additional defendant is not the date when the original action is filed, but on the date when he was included in the amended pleading. Last section. How do you interpret or construe the Rules of Court? Sec. 6. Construction. - These Rules shall be liberally construed in order to promote their objective of securing a just, speedy and inexpensive disposition of every action and proceeding. (2a) So, the Rules of Court shall be interpreted liberally in order to promote their object which is to promote their objective of securing a just, speedy and inexpensive disposition of every action and proceeding. The purpose of Procedural Law is to hasten litigation. So you do not interpret it to prolong a case. That is based on the principle of liberal construction. According to the SC in one case commenting on this: DE GUZMAN vs. SANDIGANBAYAN 256 SCRA 171, (en banc) HELD: The Rules of Court was conceived and promulgated to set forth guidelines in the dispensation of justice but not to bind and chain the hand that dispenses it, for otherwise, courts will be mere slaves to or robots of technical rules, shorn of judicial discretion. That is precisely why courts in rendering real justice have always been, as they in fact ought to be, conscientiously guided by the norm that when on the balance, technicalities take a backseat against substantive rights, and not the other way around. Truly then, technicalities, should give way to the realities of the situation. So, the purpose of procedure is to help the hand that dispenses justice and not to tie these hands. Otherwise, the courts will become mere robots. And, as much as possible, courts should avoid technicalities. To give way to the realities of the situation. In one case, Lawsuits, unlike duels, are not to be won by a rapiers thrust. (Alonzo vs. Villamor, 16 Phil. 315) Hindi yan espadahan na ang unang magsaksak, daog . That is not the concept of litigation. You do not lie in ambush. Thats another pronouncement. Thats why the SC said in another case: SANTOS vs. COURT OF APPEALS 198 SCRA 806 HELD: Procedural rules are not intended to hamper litigants or complicate litigation but, indeed, to provide for a system under which suitors may be heard in the correct form and manner and at the prescribed time in a peaceful confrontation before a judge whose authority they acknowledge. The other alternative is the settlement of their conflict through the barrel of a gun.

Property of LAKAS ATENISTA

61

1997 Rules on Civil Procedure 2001 Edition

Rule 01 General Provisions

Meaning, the purpose of the rules is for people to fight each other in a civilized way. If you cannot accept the judicial system, what is your alternative? The only alternative is to shoot your opponent. We will settle our conflict through the barrel of a gun. Barilan na lang tayo. So if you do not accept the system of justice, that is your alternative. For all its shortcomings and its defects, the judicial system is still the civilized way of dealing with your opponent. BAR QUESTION: When may lapses in the literal observance in the Rules of Court be excused? A: In the case of ETHEL CASE, ET AL vs. FERNANDO JUGO, ET AL 77 Phil. 523 HELD: Lapses in the literal observance of a rule of procedure will be overlooked: 1.) when they do not involved public policy; 2.) when they arose from an honest mistake or unforeseen accident; 3.) when they have not prejudiced the adverse party; and 4.) when they have not deprived the court of its authority. One final note, while it is true that the Rules of Court should be liberally construed as a general rule, there are certain provision which according to the SC, should be strictly construed because they were intended precisely to minimize delay. A good example would be provisions which prescribe the time during which certain acts are going to be done, like the filing of an answer, because iif you will disregard this, it will promote more delay rather than expediiite litigations. Another example is the filing of a notice of appeal. Hindi mo pwedeng palitan yan. These are the provisions which are to be strictly construed because while it is true that the Rules of Procedure are to be liberally construed, it is not a license to completely ignore these rules. Even the SC made the warning. Like in the cases of ANTONIO vs. COURT OF APPEALS 167 SCRA 127 HELD: It is the common practice of litigants who have no excuse for not observing the procedural rules to minimize the same as mere technicalities. Then they cry for due process. These procedural rules are in fact intended to ensure an orderly administration of justice precisely to guarantee the enjoyment of substantive rights. LIMPOT vs. COURT OF APPEALS 170 SCRA 367

Property of LAKAS ATENISTA

62

1997 Rules on Civil Procedure 2001 Edition

Rule 01 General Provisions

HELD: Procedural rules are not be belittled or dismissed simply because their nonobservance may have resulted in prejudice to a party's substantive rights, as in this case. Like all rules, they are required to be followed except only when for the most persuasive of reasons they may be relaxed to relaxed to relieve a litigant of an injustice not commensurate with the degree of his thoughtlessness in not complying with the procedure prescribed. While it is true that a litigation is not a game of technicalities, this does not mean that the Rules of Court may be ignored at will and at random to the prejudice of the orderly presentation and assessment of the issues and their just resolution. This reminds me of a lawyer who did not comply with the rules and he was arguing that the rules should be liberally construed. And then the judge says: There is a thin line between liberal construction of the rules and gross ignorance of the rules! Yaan! It is either you did not follow the rules strictly or you do not really know the rules. published by LAKAS ATENISTA 1997 1998: FOURTH YEAR: Anna Vanessa Angeles Glenda Buhion Joseph Martin Castillo Aaron Philip Cruz Pearly Joan Jayagan Anderson Lo Yogie Martirizar Frecelyn Mejia Dorothy Montejo Rowena Panales Regina Sison Ruby Teleron Marilou Timbol Maceste Uy Perla Vicencio Liberty Wong Jude Zamora Special Thanks to: Marissa Corrales and July Romena SECOND YEAR: Jonalyn Adiong Emily Alio Karen Allones Joseph Apao Melody Penelope Batu Gemma Betonio Rocky Cabarroguis Charina Cabrera Marlon Cascuejo Mike Castaos Karen de Leon Cherry Frondozo Jude Fuentes Maila Ilao Ilai Llena Rocky Malaki Jenny Namoc Ines Papaya Jennifer Ramos Paisal Tanjili

LAKAS ATENISTA 20012002: REVISION COMMITTEE: Melissa Suarez Jessamyn Agustin Judee Uy Janice Joanne Torres Genie Salvania Pches Fernandez Riezl Locsin Kenneth Lim Charles Concon Roy Acelar Francis Ampig Karen Cacabelos Maying Dadula Hannah Examen Thea Guadalope Myra Montecalvo Paul Ongkingco Michael Pito Rod Quiachon Maya Quitain Rina Sacdalan Lyle Santos Joshua Tan Thaddeus Tuburan John Vera Cruz Mortmort

Property of LAKAS ATENISTA

63