CIVIL PROCEDURE

FOR MISAMIS UNIVERSITY REMEDIAL LAW REVIEW

CIVIL PROCEDURE
February 20, 2016
1. Define the following: (1) Civil action[1]; (2) Criminal action[2]; (3)Special proceeding.[3] 1
2. What are the special civil actions?[4] 2
3. Can a petition for judicial settlement of estate be dismissed for failure of the petitioners to
aver that earnest efforts toward a compromise involving members of the same family have been
made prior to the filing of the petition?[5] 3
4. When is an action deemed commenced?[6] 4
5. May a complaint be filed by registered mail? If so, when it is deemed commenced.[7] 5
6. A complaint filed for recovery of possession of real property also prayed for moral and
exemplary damages the amounts of which have been left to the courts discretion, and for actual
damages the amount of which shall be proven at the trial. The docket fees for the action
involving the real property have been paid, but not those for the related damages, the amount of
which have not been specified; 1.(a) Did the trial court acquire jurisdiction over the action?[8]
(b) May the action be dismissed?[9] 2.(b) Is the rule on the payment of docket fees in ordinary
civil actions the same as that for the claim of damages which are impliedly instituted in criminal
cases?[10] (91 Bar Q5). 6
7. The respondent offered to buy a parcel of land from the National Tobacco Administration.
The deed of sale was signed by Respondent and he paid the 20% downpayment but the
Petitioners, officers of the NTA, refused to implement the sale. Respondent thus filed against the
Petitioners a Petition for Mandamus with Damages. In the body of the petition, the amount of the
1 (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. 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; (2) A criminal action is one
by which the State prosecutes a person for an act or omission punishable by law; and (3) A special proceeding is a
remedy by which a party seeks to establish a status, a right, or a particular fact.
2 It has special features not found in ordinary civil actions. It is governed by ordinary rules but subject to specific
rules prescribed Rules 62-71.
3 No. The petition could not be dismissed by reason of failure to observe the provision under Article 222 of the
Civil Code as the instant case is govern by the rules special proceeding wherein such rule or provisio is inapplicable.
4 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 (Sec. 5, Rule 1 of the Rules
of Court).
5 Yes, it may be filed by registered mail and that the date of mailing or date when it is stamped received by the
post office is the date of filing as contemplated under the rules (Sec. 3, Rule 13).
6 1. (a) No. It did not acquire jurisdiction over the action. Under Philippines jurisdiction, It is not simply the filing
of the complaint or pleading but the payment of the prescribed docket fee that vests the trial court w/ jurisdiction
over the subject matter or nature of the action. Thus, in the case at hand, the complainant having not completely paid
the required docket fees vests no jurisdiction to the trial court. (b) Yes, the action may be dismissed. In Manchester
case, the high court ruled that all complaints, petitions, answers, & similar pleadings should specify the amount of
damages being prayed for not only in the pleading but also in the prayer & said damages should be considered in the
assessment of the filing of fees in any case. Any pleading that fails to comply w/ this requirement shall not be
accepted nor admitted, & shall be expunged from the record. In the case at hand, the amount of damages is not
specified thus the same may be dismissed. 2. (b) Yes, they are the same as ruled in Machester case.
..........
Page No. 1

moral and exemplary damages and the attorneys fees were mentioned but they were not
mentioned at all in the prayer. The Petitioners filed a motion to dismiss for failure to pay the
docket fees on the moral and exemplary damages and attorneys fees. The Respondent then filed
an amended petition specifying the amount of the damages and fees in the prayer and also asking
that the deed of sale executed by NTA in favor of Stanford East Realty Corporation be declared
void and a TCT in favor of Petitioner be issued. The trial court, over the Petitioners objections,
admitted the amended petition stating that the Respondent had already paid the docketing fee.
Did the trial court act properly in admitting the amended petition?[11] 7
8. P was a former record owner of 100 shares of stock in the Manila Golf Club. Upon his return
from the U.S., he discovered that the shares in his name were cancelled and new shares issued in
favor of the NSC. P filed an action against NSC and MGC to compel the assignment of shares of
stock in his favor. P paid the docket fee for actions incapable of pecuniary estimation, which was
only about P600. After trial NSC filed a motion to dismiss on the ground that P should have paid
the docket fee based on the value of the stocks sought to be recovered and since the proper
docket fees were not paid, the trial court therefore did not acquire jurisdiction. (a) Were the
proper docket fees paid?[12] Explain. (b) Should the motion to dismiss filed by NSC be granted?
[13] Explain. 8
9. May the trial court allow the payment by installment of the docket fee where the plaintiff
pleads financial difficulty?[14] 9
10. M et al., as human rights victims obtained a favorable judgment against the estate of Pres.
Marcos in the amount of $1.9B. They filed a complaint with RTC for the enforcement of such
judgment which has become final and executory. The Marcos Estate filed a motion to dismiss for
non-payment of docket fees which it argued should be based on the amount of the judgment
award sought to be enforced. M et al. countered that an action to enforce a foreign judgment is
incapable of pecuniary estimation; hence the rate of Php 610 is sufficient. Should the docket fees
be computed based on the amount of the judgment award sought to be enforced?[15] 10
11. In the proceedings for the settlement of the estate of Alice, a contingent money claim for
commission in the event of the sale of properties of the estate was filed by Alan with the probate
court. The executrix moved for the dismissal of the claim on the ground that the docket fee under
S7(a) R141 was not paid. The RTC dismissed the money claim. Was the dismissal proper?[16] 11
12. What are the instances when the docket fees need not be paid at the commencement of the
suit but may be considered as a lien on the judgment award?[17] 12
7 No. The trial court did not act properly in admitting the amended petition without having the reassessment of
docket fees and likewise sans the payment of any deficiency on the docket fees.
8 (a) No. There was no proper payment of docket fees as the same should have been based on the value of the
shares. (b) Yes, the motion to dismiss should be granted due to failure to pay the required docket fees which as such
did not vest jurisdiction on the trial court.
9 No. Installment payment of docket fees is no longer allowed as the Legaspi rule is now being overruled by the
Manchester rule.
10 No. It should not as the case of enforcement of foreign judgment is deemed considered as incapable for pecuniary
estimation. (Mijares vs. Javier case)
11 No. The dismissal is not proper because under Philippine jurisdiction payment of docket fees for contingent claim
is not necessary. (Alan Joseph A. Sheker vs. Estate of Alice O. Sheker-Victoria Medina, Administrix, G.R. No.
157912, Dec. 13, 2007)
12 1. When prosecuting as an indigent party. (Sec. 21, Rule 3), and 2. when the amount of the damages claimed is
not specifically alleged in the complaint or information, but the court subsequently awards such, the filing fees based
on the amount awarded shall constitute a first lien on the judgment (Sec. 1Rule 111).
..........
Page No. 2

13. The petition for change of name R108 did not implead the local civil registrar. However a
copy of the petition was furnished the local civil registrar. Judgment was rendered granting the
petition. On appeal the OSG contends that the judgment was null and void since an indispensable
party, the local civil registrar, was not impleaded. May the judgment be set aside?[18] 13
14. What is a cause of action?[19] 14
15. What is the importance of a cause of action?[20] 15
16. Define the following terms:(1) Right of action[21]; (2) Relief[22]; (3) Remedy[23]; (4)
Subject matter[24] 16
17. Illustrate the foregoing terms:
Plaintiff lent P500,000 to Defendant. The loan is secured by a real estate mortgage executed by
X in favor of the Plaintiff. The Defendant failed to pay the loan on the due date despite demand
from Plaintiff.[25] 17
18. Distinguish a cause of action from a right of action.[26] 18
19. May there be a cause of action without a corresponding right of action?[27] 19
20. Is there a cause of action in proceedings for declaratory relief?[28] 20
21. What is meant by splitting a cause of action?[29] 21
22. What is the effect of splitting a cause of action?[30] 22
23. SRBI mortgaged several parcels of land to Metrobank as security for its loan. Then SRBI
and Metrobank entered into a credit line agreement with the same mortgaged properties as
collateral. SRBI defaulted and Metrobank filed an action for extrajudicial foreclosure of the
mortgage. Subsequently, Metrobank filed an action for collection of money arising from the
export bill purchases under the credit line agreement. Metrobank bought the properties at the
foreclosure but the bid price was below SRBIs obligations. SRBI moved to dismiss the action
13 Yes, the judgment may be set aside. As ruled, The necessary consequence of the failure to implead the civil
registrar as an indispensable party and to give notice by publication of the petition for correction of entry was to
render the proceeding of the trial court, so far as the correction of entry was concerned, null and void for lack of
jurisdiction both as to party and as to the subject matter. (Republic v. CA, G.R. No. 103695, Mar. 15, 1996). Along
with the tenor of the following jurisprudential doctrine, thus, said judgment may be set aside.
14 It is the act or omission by which a party violates a rights of another (Sec. 2, Rule 2).
15 It is important in order to have right of action.
16 (1) Right of action refers to the remedial right or right to relief granted by law to a party to institute an action
against a person who has committed a delict or wrong against him. (2) Relief refers to judgment sought. (3) Remedy
is the means by which the violation of a right is prevented, redressed, or compensated. (4) Subject-matter refers to
the cause, thing and object of dispute.
17 With the default of the defendant, the plaintiff can either demand payment of the loan or to foreclose the real
property.
18 Cause of action is the act or omission by which a party violates a rights of another (Sec. 2, Rule 2). While, right
of action refers to the remedial right or right to relief granted by law to a party to institute an action against a person
who has committed a delict or wrong against him.
19 No. The rule is There is no right of action where there is no cause of action.
20 Yes, there is cause of action as again there could be no right of action without cause of action.
21 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 other.
22 The filing of one or a judgment upon the merits in any one is available as a ground for the dismissal of the other.
..........
Page No. 3

for collection on the ground that Metrobank is splitting its cause of action. Should the motion to
dismiss be granted?[31] 23
24. Prince Chong entered into a lease contract with King Kong over a commercial building
where the former conducted his hardware business. The lease contract stipulated, among others,
a monthly rental of P50,000.00 for a four (4)-year period commencing on January 1, 2010. On
January 1, 2013, Prince Chong died. Kin Il Chong was appointed administrator of the estate of
Prince Chong, but the former failed to pay the rentals for the months of January to June 2013
despite King Kongs written demands. Thus, on July 1, 2013, King Kong filed with the Regional
Trial Court (RTC) an action for rescission of contract with damages and payment of accrued
rentals as of June 30, 2013. (A) Can Kin Il Chong move to dismiss the complaint on the ground
that the RTC is without jurisdiction since the amount claimed is only P300,000.00?[32] Explain.
(B) If the rentals accrued during the lifetime of Prince Chong, and King Kong also filed the
complaint for sum of money during that time, will the action be dismissible upon Prince Chongs
death during the pendency of the case?[33] Explain. 24
25. P sued D for specific performance of a contract. The court decided in favor of D and
dismissed PS complaint. After the dismissal had become final, P sued D to have the same
contract reformed to make it conform to their true intent and to recover upon the reformed
contract. Is the second action barred by res judicata?[34] 25
26. Petitioner filed with the CFI a complaint against the Private Respondent in 1969 for quieting
of title with damages, wherein the former seeks to be declared the owner of the subject land. In
1970, the private Respondent dispossessed petitioners of the land in question and stayed there
until January 1978. The Private Respondent won in the CFI but the CA reversed and declared the
Petitioner as the owner of the subject land and ordered the Private Respondent to pay Petitioner
P100,000 as the latters share in the proceeds of the sale of the copra from the coconuts harvested
in the land. The Decision became final and executor in February 1978. In the same month,
Petitioner filed a second case with the CFI against Private Respondent seeking to recover from
the latter the incomes from the subject land from 1970 up to 1978 when possession of the land
was delivered to the Petitioner. Private Respondent filed a motion to dismiss the second case on
the ground of res judicata. Should the second motion to dismiss be granted?[35] Explain. 26
27. Nasugatan sued Sagasa for injuries he suffered when Sagasa drove his car recklessly and
bumped into Nasugatan. Sagasa confessed judgment and was adjudged to pay P5,000.00.
Nasugatan became blind because of the injuries he sustained in the accident. He filed another suit
against Sagasa, this time for P100,000.00. May Sagasa plead the filing of the first complaint in
abatement of the second suit and contend that the judgment on the merits in the first case
constitutes a bar in the second? Explain[36] 27
28. P filed with the RTC an accion reivindicatoria over a parcel of rice land against D, alleging
that the same was sold to him by the rightful owner S and praying that he (P) be declared the
owner of the land and that D deliver possession to him. D filed an answer in which he also
23 Yes, the motion to dismiss should be granted as the second case involves same cause of action as the first.
24 A. No. The case wont be dismissed as the cause of action is one which is incapable from pecuniary estimation
and the amount of claim is of no issue in the case at hand. B. No. It wont be dismissed as the decedent could be
substituted.
25 Yes, this is a case where res judicata is applicable.
26 Yes, it is subject to res judicata.
27 No. This is a case wherein supervening event gives rise to another cause of action.
..........
Page No. 4

counterclaimed for moral and exemplary damages for the unwarranted filing of the suit by P.
During the pendency of the case, P disposed D of the subject land and proceeded to harvest the
rice. Judgment was rendered by the RTC dismissing Ps suit. The judgment became final. P
delivered possession back to D. D then filed an action before the RTC against P seeking to
recover the value of the rice harvested by P. P. filed a motion to dismiss on the ground of res
judicata. Should the motion to dismiss be granted?[37] 28
29. What are the rules governing joinder of causes of action?[38] 29
30. What is the totality rule?[39] 30
31. Give the rule on joinder of parties.[40] 31
32. What is the meaning of transaction as used in S6 R3?[41] 32
33. Peter, the owner of a parcel of land, files a complaint for recovery of possession against 30
persons who each occupy a separate and distinct portion of the land. Is the joinder of defendants
proper?[42] 33
34. P, a Manila resident, filed a complaint against D, a resident of Iloilo City, in the RTC of
Manila. The complaint joins 2 causes of action: one for collection of P500,000 and the other for
title to real property in Iloilo City with an assessed value of P20,000, both causes of action
arising out of the same transaction between the parties. Was there a proper joinder of causes of
action?[43] 34
35. P filed a complaint in the RTC of Manila. The complaint joins 2 causes of action: one for
collection of P350,000.00 against D and another for specific performance against E (Ds friend)
based on Es undertaking that he will assign certain shares of stock in favor of P if D defaults in
the payment of the loan. Assume that the joinder of D and E as defendants complies with S6 R3.
Was there a proper joinder of causes of action?[44] 35
36. P, a Manila resident, filed a complaint against D, a resident of Iloilo City, in the RTC of
Manila. The complaint joins 2 causes of action: one for collection of P300,000 and the other for
recovery of title to real property in Iloilo City with an assessed value of P60,000, both causes of
action arising out of the same transaction between the parties.(a).Was there a proper joinder of
28 The motion should be granted as it is a separate cause of action.
29 The rules are: (a) The party joining the causes of action shall comply with the rules on joinder of parties; (b) The
joinder shall not include special civil actions or actions governed by special rules; (c) Where the causes of action are
between the same parties but pertain to different venues or jurisdictions, the joinder may be allowed in the Regional
Trial Court provided one of the causes of action falls within the jurisdiction of said court and the venue lies therein;
and (d) 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.
30 Totality Rule-where there are several claims or causes of actions between the same or different parties embodied
in one complaint, the amount of the demand shall be the totality of the claims in all causes of action irrespective of
whether the causes of action arose out of the same or different transaction (Rule 2, Sec.5 [d]).
31 The joinder of parties becomes compulsory when the one involved is an indispensable party. Clearly, the rule
directs acompulsory joinder of indispensable parties, (Riano, Civil Procedure: A Restatement for the Bar, p. 222,
2009 ed.)
32 The transaction is an express trust.
33 Yes, there is as they are indispensable parties.
34 No. There was no proper joinder of causes of action as the same involves two (2) types of action with separate
venue.
35 Yes, there was as they are both indispensable parties.
..........
Page No. 5

causes of action?[45]; and (b). If you were the lawyer for D, what would you do?[46] 36
37. P lent P250,000 to D which remains unpaid despite several demands by P. P also entered into
a contract for services with D. However D has breached a material provision of the contract for
services. P filed a complaint against D before the MTC of Manila wherein he joins the cause of
action for collection and rescission. Should the joinder of causes of action be allowed?[47] 37
38. P(lessor) files a complaint with the RTC wherein he joins two causes of action: one against
the lessee B to collect unpaid rentals of P250,000 and the other against sub-lessee C to collect
damages on the leased premises amounting to P200,000. C files a motion to drop him from the
case on the ground of mis-joinder. Should the court grant Cs motion?[48] 38
39. P is a dealer of tires in Baguio City. A bought P200,000 worth of tires from P. The same day
B bought P200,000 worth of tires from P. Both A and B did not pay P. P filed a case with the
RTC of Baguio City joining his causes of action against A for collection of P200,000 and against
B for collection of P200,000. B filed a motion to dismiss the case on the ground of lack of
subject-matter jurisdiction. Should the motion to dismiss be granted?[49] Explain. 39
40. D borrowed P250,000 from P. the loan remains unpaid despite several demands from P. in
another transaction, D bought from P a jeep worth P250,000. Although the jeep had been
delivered to him, D did not pay P the purchase price despite several demands. The loan and the
sale are unrelated to each other and do not have a common question of law or fact. P filed a
complaint against D before the RTC of Manila wherein P joins the two causes of action. D filed a
motion to dismiss on the ground of lack of jurisdiction. D argues that there is a misjoinder of
causes of action since the two claims for relief do not arise from the same transaction or series of
transactions and there is no common question of law of fact. Should the motion to dismiss be
granted?[50] Explain. 40
41. Ps bus sideswiped a car owned by G. the cost of the repair was P450,000. The insurer paid
G P60,000 and so the balance of P390,000 was shouldered by G. the insurer and G filed a single
complaint before the RTC of Makati against P wherein the insurer claimed for P60,000 and G
claimed for P390,000. P filed an answer wherein he contends that the RTC of Makati does not
have jurisdiction since the separate claims of the insurer and G fall below the jurisdictional
amount and joinder of causes of action was not proper. Does the RTC of Makati have
jurisdiction?[51] Explain. 41
42. P is a resident of Iligan City, while R and M are residents of Ozamis City. They are the coowners of a parcel of residential land located in Tangub City with an assessed value of P200,000.
P borrowed P200,000 from R which he promised to pay on or before December 1, 2012.
However, P failed to pay his loan. P also rejected R and Ms proposal to partition the property. R
filed a complaint against P and M in the RTC of Tangub City for the partition of the property. He
also incorporated in his complaint his action against P for the collection of the latters P200,000
loan plus interest and attorneys fees. State with reasons whether it was proper for R to join his
36 A. No joinder of causes of action. B. If I were the lawyer, to move for the dismissal of the same as there was no
proper joinder of causes of action.
37 Yes, it may be allowed.
38 No. Mis-joinder is not ground for dismissal but the court may order amendment of pleading.
39 Yes, it should be dismissed as they are not indispensable parties to the case.
40 No. The motion to dismiss should be denied as the same case could be joint.
41 Yes, the court has jurisdiction as the aggregate amount should be made as basis for jurisdiction.
..........
Page No. 6

causes of action in his complaint for partition against P and M in the RTC of Tangub City.[52] 42
43. R, a warehouseman, filed a complaint against V, X and Y Corporations to compel them to
interplead. He alleged therein that the three corporations claimed title and right of possession
over the goods deposited in his warehouse and that he was uncertain which of them was entitled
to the goods. After due proceedings, judgment was rendered by the court declaring that X was
entitled to the goods. The decision became final and executory. R filed a complaint against X for
the payment of P100,000 for storage charges and other advances for the goods. X filed a motion
to dismiss on the ground of res judicata. X alleged that R should have incorporated in his
complaint for interpleader his claim for storage fees and advances and that for his failure he was
barred from interposing his claim. R replied that he could not have claimed storage fees and
other advances in his complaint for interpleader because he was not yet certain as to who was
liable therefore. Resolve the motion to dismiss.[53] 43
44. Who may be parties in a civil action?[54] 44
45. Give examples of entities authorized by law to be parties in a civil action.[55] 45
46. The Tibanga Subdivision Homeowners Association (TSHA) filed a suit against P seeking to
compel her to provide an open space for Tibanga Subdivision. The records are bereft of any
showing that TSHA is an association duly organized under Philippine Law. P filed a motion to
dismiss with the HLURB on the ground of lack of legal personality of TSHA to sue. The
HLURB denied the motion to dismiss treating the action as a suit by all the parties who signed
and verified the complaint. Should the HLURB have dismissed the complaint?[56] Explain. 46
47. If the plaintiff is not a natural person or an entity authorized by law to be a party, what is the
ground of the motion to dismiss?[57] Explain. 47
48. In whose name must an action be prosecuted or defended?[58] 48
49. What is the reason for the rule that every action must be prosecuted or defended on the name
of the real party in interest?[59] 49
50. Does the rule require that a civil action be prosecuted by the real party in interest?[60]
Explain. 50
51. Who is a real party in interest?[61] 51
42 Yes, it is proper as the same remedy is available to him.
43 Motion to dismiss should be denied as res judicata is of no moment in this case.
44 The parties in a civil action are: 1. Real parties in interest; 2. Indispensable parties; 3. Representatives as parties;
4. Necessary parties; 5. Indigent parties; and 6. Pro-forma parties
45 Entities authorized by law to file civil action are: a. A registered labor organization with respect to its properties;
b. The roman catholic church; c. Estate of deceased person; d. A political party; and e. An entity not possessed of a
legal personality who enters into a contract under a representation of a legal personality and is being estopped to
deny the same.
46 No. The complaint is deemed proper that is why it should not dismiss the same.
47 The ground would be that not being a person under the law, it cannot be sued.
48 It must be prosecuted and defended in the name of real party in interest.
49 The reason, therefore, is that no parties having no cause of action shall be entertained in court except only those
who will be benefited or injured on the judgment.
50 Yes. Generally, an action shall be prosecuted by real party in interest except those actions which are allowed to
be prosecuted or defended by representatives.
51 A real party in interest is the party who stands to be benefited or injured by the judgment in a suit, or the party
entitled to the avails of the suit (Sec. 2, Rule 3, of the Rules of Court).
..........
Page No. 7

52. If an action is prosecuted in the name of someone who is not the real party in interest, what
is the remedy of the defendant?[62] Explain. 52
53. G drove the car of his father, P, and left it in the parking area of the Known Inn where he
was a guest. G entrusted the key of the car to a security guard hired by the PR Company, the
owner/operator of the Known. E, pretending to be the brother of G, got the key from the security
guard and drove away with the car. The car was never recovered. Later, P sued PR for the value
of the carnapped vehicle plus damages. PR sets up the defense that P has no interest in the case,
hence, has no cause of action, as he was not the guest of the Inn but his son, G. is the defense of
PR tenable?[63] Explain. 53
54. What is the exception to the rule that every action must be prosecuted or defended in the
name of the real party in interest?[64] 54
55. Give examples of representative parties.[65] 55
56. Give an example of a party authorized by law or the Rules of Court to sue even if he is not
the real party in interest.[66] 56
57. A complaint entitled A as Attorney-in-fact for X, Plaintiff, versus B, Defendant was filed
to recover a car in the possession of B. As power of attorney expressly authorized him (A) to
sue for the recovery of the car. B files a motion to dismiss the complaint for lack of capacity to
sue. Decide the motion.[67] Explain. 57
58. Give an exception to the rule requiring the joinder of the beneficiary.[68] 58
59. What are the rules regarding spouses as parties to a suit?[69] 59
60. Husband and wife lent money to defendant spouses A and B. A and B did not pay the loan.
Husband alone filed a suit to collect the loan against A and B. A and B filed a motion to dismiss
on the ground that the wife was not impleaded as a co-plaintiff in violation of S4R3. Should the
motion to dismiss be granted?[70] Explain. 60
61. D(wife) and E (husband) were married in 1990. E works as an employee in a private
company abroad. In 1995, D (without Es knowledge) borrowed money from C to put up a
drugstore the income of which was intended to defray the household expenses. The drugstore
however incurred only losses and eventually went under. C sues D and E to recover the debt.
Should the absolute community be liable?[71] Explain. 61
52 The defendant may move to dismiss the case on the ground that the plaintiff has no legal capacity to sue.
53 No. The defense is not tenable. P, being the real and registered owner of the carnapped car has the legal standing
to sue.
54 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 the contract involves things belonging to the principal.
55 Representative parties are: a. A trustee of an express trust; b. A guardian; c. An executor or administrator; d. A
party authorized by law or the rules.
56 A natural or juridical person, entity authorized by law, peoples organization, nongovernmental organization,or
any public interest group accredited by or registered with any government agency.
57 The motion should be denied as the complaint is proper.
58 When an agent act in his own name and for the benefit of an undisclosed principal.
59 Husband and wife shall sue or be sued jointly, except as provided by law (Sec. 4, Rule 3, of the Rules of Court).
60 No. The motion to dismissed should not be granted. Anyone of the joint creditors, may sue against defendants as
contemplated by the rules, and is not a violation to the rule laid down under Sec. 4, Rule 3.
61 No. The absolute community property should not made liable to the same. In the case at hand, it is very clear
..........
Page No. 8

62. Would your answer be the same if D was designated administrator-spouse?[72] Explain. 62
63. The Philippine Blooming Corporation obtained a P50-million loan from Ayala Investment.
As security for the loan, the Executive Vice-President of PBM, Alfredo Ching was the designated
administrator-spouse of the absolute community. PBM defaulted on the loan so Ayala Investment
sued PBM and Ching. A final and executory judgment was rendered in favor of Ayala Investment
and it sought to levy on the conjugal properties of the Spouses Ching. May the sheriff levy on the
absolute community properties?[73] 63
64. Would your answer be the same if it was proved by Ayala Investment that because of the
grant of the loan, the employment of Ching in PBM would be prolonged, that the shares in PBM
of the Ching family would rise in value, and that Mr. Chings prestige in PBM and his career
therein would be enhanced?[74] 64
65. Who is an indispensable Party?[75] 65
66. Who is a necessary party?[76] 66
67. Distinguish an indispensable party from a necessary party.[77] 67
68. What is the rule regarding an indispensable party?[78] 68
69. What is the result if an indispensable party is not impleaded in a suit?[79] 69
70. In a declaratory relief proceeding, what is the effect of the failure to include as defendant a
party who would be adversely affected by the declaratory judgment of the court?[80] 70
71. What is the test for determining whether a party is an indispensable party or not?[81] 71

62
63
64
65
66
67

68
69

70
71

that the proceeds of loan did not redound to the benefit of the family. Thus, only the property of the wife could
be made liable to the same.
My answer would be different as the transaction entered into likewise bind the absent spouse.
No. It is the corporation who is liable, not the executive president, Mr. Ching.
It has still no bearing as it is still the obligation of the corporation, not of Mr. Ching.
The indispensable parties refer to those parties in interest without whom final determination can be had of an
action.
One who is not indispensable but who ought to be joined as a party if complete relief is to be accorded as to
those already parties, or for a complete determination or settlement of the claim subject of the action (Sec. 8,
Rule 3, of the Rules of Court)
The indispensable parties refer to those parties in interest without whom final determination can be had of an
action. (Sec. 7, Rule 3, of the Rules of Court) While, necessary party is one who is not indispensable but who
ought to be joined as a party if complete relief is to be accorded as to those already parties, or for a complete
determination or settlement of the claim subject of the action (Sec. 8, Rule 3, of the Rules of Court)
Indispensable parties shall be joined either as plaintiffs or defendants. (Sec. 7, Rule 3, of the Rules of Court)
The failure to implead an indispensable party will not cause automatic dismissal of the case. In this view, the
court shall order the amendments of complaint to implead such indispensable party, and failure to comply said
order will cause the dismissal of the same. Likewise, if judgment has been rendered, the same shall be
considered null and void.
It shall not prejudice the rights of persons not parties to the action (Sec. 2, Rule 63, of the Rules of Court).
In Regner vs. Logarta and Arcelona vs. CA, the test to determine indispensable party is as follows: an
indispensable party is a party who has an interest in the controversy or subject matter that a final adjudication
cannot be made, in his absence, without injuring or affecting that interest, a party who has not only an interest in
the subject matter of the controversy, but also has an interest of such nature that a final decree cannot be made
without affecting his interest or leaving the controversy in such a condition that its final determination may be
wholly inconsistent with equity and good conscience. It has also been considered that an indispensable party is a
person in whose absence there cannot be a determination between the parties already before the court which is
effective, complete or equitable. Further, an indispensable party is one who must be included in an action before
it may properly go forward.

..........
Page No. 9

72. Give examples of indispensable parties.[82] 72

73. D obtained a car loan from a car dealer evidenced by a promissory note and secured by a
chattel mortgage over the car executed by D in favor of the car dealer. The note and the chattel
mortgage were assigned by the car dealer to BA Finance. D defaulted in the payment of the loan.
BA Finance learned later on that the car was in the possession of F. BA Finance filed an action
for replevin against F to recover the car. D was not impleaded. Is D an indispensable party?[83]
73

74. In the preceding problem, assume that BA Finance filed the replevin action against D
without impleading F. Is F an indispensable party?[84] 74
75. Give examples of necessary parties.[85]
76. Quirino and Milagros are co-owners of a credit extended to the spouses Carandang. Quirino
sued the spouses Carandang. The spouses Carandang filed a motion to dismiss on the ground that
an indispensable party, Milagros, was not impleaded as a co-plaintiff. The Spouses Carandang
contend that a co-owner is an indispensable party. Should the motion to dismiss be granted?[86]
77. D, E, and F are solidarily indebted to P for P90,000. P files a collection case against D only.
Are E and F indispensable parties?[87]
78. In an action to foreclose a real estate mortgage, is the junior mortgagee an indispensable
party?[88]
79. Is a solidary co-debtor a necessary party?[89]
80. Is a joint debtor a necessary party?[90]
81. D,E and F are jointly indebted to C in the amount of P9,000,000. C files a collection suit
against D for the amount of P3,000,000. The complaint alleges that D, E and F are jointly
indebted to C but that C is only suing D in order to avoid additional factual issues which would
just prolong the trial. D files a motion to dismiss on the ground that C did not implead E and F.
(a) Should the motion to dismiss be granted? Assume that the motion to dismiss was not granted.
a) The court however ordered C to implead E and F.[91] Is the order of the court proper?[92]
Explain.
b) Assume that C did not comply with the court order. May the court dismiss the case? Assume
that the court continued trying the case despite Cs non-compliance with its order. The court
rendered judgment in favor of C against D for P3,000,000. The judgment became final.
Subsequently C filed a case against E for collection of P3,000,000.[93]
c) If you were Es counsel, what would you do?[94]
72 All the co-owners of a property are indispensable parties in an action for partition of that property because the
court cannot divide the same with some co-owners absent and not heard on their rights. Any decision the court
makes cannot bind unimpleaded co-owners and will render the partition void. When a case such as this is brought up
on appeal, it is generally remanded to the court of origin for further proceedings. (Lagunilla v. Velasco, G.R. No.
169276, July 16, 2009. )
73 No. D is not an indispensable party in the replevin case as the same remedy is directed only to the recovery of
possession of personal property from F, which is the subject car.
74 Yes, F is indispensable as he is the one in possession of the car (the subject of replevin).
..........
Page No. 10

82. A passenger bus collided with a tricycle resulting in damage to the tricycle and injuries to its
driver. The Plaintiff tricycle driver filed a case for damages against the bus owner alone but did
not implead the bus driver as defendant. Judgment was rendered in favor of the plaintiff. The
defendant bus owner argues that the judgment was void for failure to implead the bus driver as
an indispensable party. Is the judgment void?[95]
83. Fimarco mortgaged its heavy equipment to the DBP. DBP assigned the mortgage to APT.
Subsequently P filed a suit against Filmarco for recovery of a parcel of land in which the
mortgaged equipment was located. A final and executory judgment was rendered in favor of P.
The APT then filed an action to annul the judgment. It argued that it was an indispensable party
and should have been impleaded in the suit filed by P against Filmarco. Should the judgment be
annulled?[96]
84. P filed an action with the RTC to nullify the TCT of A. There was an existing registered
mortgage over the TCT in favor of Metrobank. The bank was however not impleaded in the
cancellation suit. The court rendered judgment cancelling the TCT. The judgment became final
and executory. Can the bank file an action to annul the judgment of the RTC? If so in what court
should the bank file the action?[97]
85. An impostor (Oliver 1) mortgaged the property of Oliver 2 to Chinabank misrepresenting
that she is the real Oliver. Oliver 2 filed an action in the RTC against the bank seeking to nullify
the mortgage on the ground that shes the real Oliver. Oliver 2 did not implead Oliver 1.
Chinabank filed a motion to dismiss on the ground of non-joinder of an indispensable party. The
trial court denied the motion to dismiss. Instead of filing an answer, Chinabank filed a special
civil action with the CA to set aside the Judges order denying its motion to dismiss. Meanwhile
for failure of Chinabank to answer within the reglementary period it was declared in default by
the trial court and Oliver 2 allowed to present evidence ex parte.
a. Did the trial court properly deny Chinabanks motion to dismiss?[98]
b. Did the trial court properly declare Chinabank in default?[99]
86. P filed with the RTC an action to annul the issuance of an OCT registered in the name of A
(deceased). P did not however implead the heirs of A. A judgment in favor of P annulling the
OCT was rendered by the RTC. The heirs of A then filed with the RTC of Lapu-Lapu City an
action to annul the judgment nullifying the OCT.
a. In an action to annul an OCT issued in the name of the registered owners, are the heirs of such
registered owner indispensable parties?[100]
b. Should the RTC grant the action to annul the judgment?[101]
87. P files an action with the RTC of Las Pinas City, Branch 170, to recover a parcel of land coowned by D. P however did not implead in his complaint E and F, the co-owners of the land. The
RTC rendered a judgment in favor of P ordering the reconveyance of the land to P. No appeal
having been filed the judgment became final and executor on 10 January 2004 and was entered
in the book of entries of judgment on the same day. E and F learned of the judgment on 10
March 2004 and on 15 March 2004 they filed a petition for relief from the judgment with Branch
170 of the Las Pinas RTC. P filed an answer seeking the dismissal of the petition for relief.
..........
Page No. 11

a. If you were the judge, would you dismiss the petition for relief?[102]
b. If the dismissal of the petition for relief was proper, what was the appropriate action that E
and F should have availed of and in what court should they have filed the same?[103]
88.
Is the non-joinder of necessary or indispensable parties a ground for a motion to
dismiss?[104]
89. 7J, a service contractor, provided manpower services of Lotte Philippines Inc. Pursuant to
this, the private respondents were assigned to provide janitorial, maintenance, and utility services
to Lotte. Lotte dispensed with the services of private respondents. The private respondents filed a
labor case against Lotte and 7J. The labor arbiter ruled that the private respondents employer
was 7J not Lotte. NLRC affirmed. The private respondents filed a petition for certiorari with the
CA against NLRC and Lotte, insisting that Lotte is their employer but they did implead 7J. CA
ruled that Lotte was the employer not 7J and held Lotte solidarily liable with 7J. May the CAs
decision be set aside?[105]
90. Who is an unwilling co-plaintiff?[106]
91. What is the remedy if there is an unwilling co-plaintiff?[107]
92. Give examples of an unwilling co-plaintiff.[108]
93. Whose option is it to implead the unwilling co-plaintiff?[109]
94. What is a class suit?[110]
95. What are the requisites of a class suit?[111]
96. What shall the court do if it finds that the requisites of a class suit have been met?[112]
97. May a group member who was not appointed as a representative intervene in the suit?[113]
98. N Magazine published an article titled An island of fear which wrote all alleged abuses
committed by sugarcane plantation owners against their workers. The sugarcane planters filed a
class suit for libel and damages against N. Was the filing of a class suit proper?[114] Explain.
99. If a class suit is not proper, what is the recourse of the defendant?[115] Explain.
100.
L, in Cebu, sold a quantity of rice for P20,000 to R in Toledo, and shipped the rice
through C Transportation. R refused to pay L, claiming that the rice was never delivered to him.
C, on the other hand, claimed that it has delivered the rice to R. whom should L sue?[116]
Explain.
101. May a defendant whose name or identity is unknown be sued?[117] Explain.
102. May an entity without juridical personality sue as a plaintiff?[118] Explain.
103. May an entity without juridical personality be sued as a defendant?[119] Explain.
104. In the complaint, is it necessary to state the names of the persons composing the entity?
[120] Explain.
..........
Page No. 12

105.

What is the duty of a partys counsel, in case of the death of the party?[121] Explain.

106.

When would the death of the party in a pending action extinguish the claim?[122]

107.
P filed an action against D, who he alleges to be his father, to claim the status of the
legitimate child. During the pendency of the case, P died. May the heirs of P be substituted in the
action?[123] Explain.
108.
Does the duty under S16R3 apply to death of a party in cases pending appeal?[124]
Explain.
109.

What is the purpose of notifying or informing the court of the death of a party?[125]

110.

Who is the legal representative of the deceased party?[126]

111.

If a party becomes incompetent or incapacitated, what will the court do?[127]

112.

In case of any transfer of interest, how the action may proceed?[128] Explain.

113.
What if there is no executor of administrator appointed by the probate court?[129]
Explain.
114.
What if no legal representative is named by the counsel for the deceased party, or if
the one so named shall fail to appear within the specified period?[130] Explain.
115.
L executed a will naming O as one of the devisees. Upon Ls death a petition for the
probate of his will was filed with the RTC. During the pendency of the probate proceedings, O
died intestate. The Q law firm entered its appearance as counsel for F, who claimed to be one of
the heirs of O and their representative. The probate court allowed the appearance of the counsel
and the substitution of O by F, who had been designated by the other heirs as their representative
in the probate court. E opposed the appearance and the substitution on the ground that under
Lawas v. CA, 143 SCRA 173 (1986), priority is given to the legal representative of the deceased,
(e.i. the executor or administrator, or in case where the heirs resort to an extrajudicial settlement
of the estate that the court may adopt the alternative of allowing the heirs to be substituted for the
deceased. Was the substitution of the deceased O by F proper?[131] Explain.
116.
P filed an action to recover possession and ownership of a parcel of land against D.
during the pendency of the case P died but substitution by his heirs was effected. The trial court
ruled in favor of P. D assert that the RTCs decision was invalid for lack of jurisdiction, since the
heirs were not substituted for the deceased P. Ps heirs, however, participated in the trial without
being substituted. Was the trial courts decision valid?[132] Explain.
117.
P filed an action to recover possession of a parcel of land against D. during the
pendency of the case, D died. P advised the court of Ds death and filed a motion for substitution
but the court did not issue an order for the substation of D. the heirs possessed the land.
Judgment was rendered in favor of P. May P enforce the judgment against the heirs?[133]
Explain.
118.
In the preceding problem, would your answer be the same if the heirs voluntarily
appeared in court and participated in the proceedings therein?[134] Explain.
..........
Page No. 13

119.
P filed an action to recover possession of parcel of land against D. during the
pendency of the case, D died. Ds counsel failed to inform the court of Ds death. The heirs
possessed the land. Judgment was rendered in favor of P. May P enforce the judgment against the
heirs?[135] Explain.
120.
P filed an action for quieting of title with damages against D. during the pendency of
the case, a notice of hearing sent to D was returned with the notation party-deceased. Ds
counsel still continued to appear for D and did not inform the court of Ds death. Judgment was
rendered in favor of P ordering D to vacate the land and return possession to P. The heirs of D,
who are now in possession, contend that the judgment was void since there was no substitution.
Are they correct?[136] Explain.
121.
A filed a complaint for the recovery of ownership of land against B who was
represented by her counsel X. in the course of the trial, B died. However, X failed to notify the
court of Bs death. The court proceeded to hear the case and rendered judgment against B. after
judgment became final, a writ of execution was issued against C, who being Bs sole heir,
acquired the property. (1) If you were counsel of C, what course of action would you take?[137]
Explain. (2) Did the failure of X to inform the court of Bs death constitute direct contempt?
[138] Explain.
122.
P filed an action for recovery of a parcel of land against D. the trial court dismissed
the case prompting P to appeal to the CA. Pending appeal, P died. The lawyer of P gave notice to
the CA of Ps death and moved for the suspension of the period to file appellants brief pending
the appointment of an administrator of Ps estate in the probate proceedings. The CA denied the
motion for suspension and dismissed Ps appeal for failure to file the appellants brief. Was the
CA correct?[139] Explain.
123.
What is the effect of a transfer of interest during the pendency of the litigation?[140]
Explain.
124.
P filed with the RTC an action to collect a loan of P500,000 from D. P was able to
obtain a writ of attachment and attached a property of D. During the pendency of the case, D
died. (a) Should the case be dismissed?[141] Explain. (b) D was substituted by his heir X. P won
the case and no appeal was made by X may P move for the execution of the judgment against X?
[142] Explain. (c) P filed the judgment as a money claim with the probate court. Does the writ of
attachment entitle P to preference over the other creditors in respect of the property attached?
[143] Explain.
125.
P filed with the RTC an action for recovery of possession of a parcel of land against D.
D died while the case was pending and was substituted by his heir X who had succeeded D in the
possession of the land. P won the case and no appeal was made by X. May P move for the
execution of the judgment against X?[144] Explain.
126.
P filed an action for tort against D who had negligently inflicted injuries upon P. D
died during the pendency of the case and was substituted by his heir X. judgment was rendered
in favor of P for P500,000. No appeal was filed by X. May P move for the execution of the
judgment against X?[145] Explain.
127.
..........
Page No. 14

P filed a complaint for sum of money against D. during the pendency of the case, D

died. Intestate proceedings for the settlement of the Ds estate commenced and notice to the
estates creditors was given for them to file their claim within six months from the first
publication of the notice. A month thereafter, on Ps motion, the administrator of Ds estate was
substituted for D in the civil case for collection. The court rendered judgment in favor of P and
Ds administrator appealed. P filed a contingent claim covering the judgment award in the
probate court. At the time of the filing of the contingent claim, the 6-month period for creditors
to file their claim had expired. In due course the judgment in favor of P was affirmed on appeal
and became final and thus P moved that the estate be ordered to pay P. The administrator
opposed the motion on the ground that the claim is time-barred since the contingent claim was
filed beyond the statute of non-claims. Is the claim of P time-barred?[146] Explain.
128.
(a) P sued to recover an unpaid loan and was awarded P333,000 by the RTC of
Manila. D did not appeal within the period allowed by law. He died six days after the lapse of the
period. Forthwith, a petition for the settlement of his estate was properly filed in the RTC of
Pampanga where an inventory of his assets was filed and correspondingly approved. Thereafter,
P filed a motion for execution with the Manila court, contending therein that the motion was
legally justified because the defendant died after the judgment in the Manila court had become
final. Resolve the motion.[147] (b) Under the same facts as (a), a writ of execution was issued by
the Manila RTC upon proper motion three days after the lapse of the period to appeal. The
corresponding levy on execution was duly effected on defendants parcel of land worth P666,000
a day before the defendant died. Would it be proper, on motion, to lift the levy on Ds property?
[148] State the reasons for your answer.
129.
Spouses B and C were the owners of a residential and boarding house with a market
value of more than P300,000. Their total earnings were more than double the minimum wage of
an employee. When the city demolished their residence and boarding house, B and C filed an
action for damages with the RTC against the city. They applied for exemption from the docket
and legal fees as indigents. They are disqualified to litigate as indigents since they have not met
the salary and property requirements under S19R141. May B and C still be exempted from
paying the docket and legal fees as pauper litigants even though they do not meet the
requirements under S19R141?[149] Explain.
130.

Define venue.[150]

131.

What is the difference between jurisdiction and venue?[151]

132.

Is venue jurisdictional?[152]

133.

Distinguish real action from personal action.[153]

134.

What is the venue of real action?[154]

135.

What is the venue of personal actions?[155]

136.
Explain.

For purposes of the Rule on venue, what is the residence o a corporation?[156]

137.
D, and American citizen, borrowed P500,000 from P, a Filipino citizen while
vacationing in the Philippines. D failed to pay. D went to the U.S. May P file a suit against D?
[157] Explain.
..........
Page No. 15

138.
P filed an action with the RTC of Bulacan, where he resides, against M and F for the
dissolution of their partnership. The main asset of the partnership was a fishpond located in
Marinduque. M and F filed an answer in which they alleged that the partnership had so far been
unproductive and that this was the result of Ps failure to contribute his share. They
counterclaimed for damages. Consequently, the court granted the intervention of Z, who alleged
that they had bought the fishpond and were now its owners. Z then filed a motion to dismiss
upon the ground that venue was improperly laid? (a) Should the motion to dismiss be granted?
[158] Explain. (b) If the action filed by P against M and F were a real action affecting title over
the fishpond, would your answer still be the same?[159] Explain.
139.
P filed a complaint against the surety with the RTC of Manila. The surety then filed a
third-party complaint against X, who had executed an indemnity agreement undertaking to
indemnify the surety in case it becomes liable under the surety bond. X filed a motion to dismiss
the third party complaint on the ground of improper venue. X pointed out that the indemnity
agreement between the surety and X contains a provision that any suit arising from the
agreement shall be solely and exclusively filed in Quezon City. Should the court dismiss the third
party complaint?[160] Explain.
140.
P filed a complaint for annulment of contracts of loan with cancellation of Real Estate
Mortgage against D in Pasig, the place where P had its office. P alleged that the contract of loan
was without the knowledge of the corporation. D moved to dismiss the complaint on the ground
that the annulment of the REM is a real action, since P sought to compel D to accept its payment
and thus affecting title over the property and free it from the encumbrance. Thus it should have
been filed in Quezon City, where the encumbered properties are located. Is a complaint for
cancellation of REM a real action?[161] Explain.
141.

When is Rule 4 on venue of actions not applicable?[162]

142.

Give examples of cases where a specific rule or law provides otherwise.[163]

143.
P applied for 6 cellular phone subscription with Piltel. P later filed with the RTC of
Iligan City a complaint for sum of money and damages against Piltel. The latter moved to
dismiss on the ground of improper venue, citing the common provision in the subscription
agreements which provides that: Venue of all suits arising from this agreement shall be in the
proper courts of Makati City. Subscriber expressly waives any other venue. Should the motion to
dismiss be granted?[164]
144.
PB Com Filed a collection case against D before the RTC of Manila, PB Coms place
of business, based on the Surety Agreement (SA) executed by D in relation to a credit line PB
Com extended to International Trading Company. However, in this promissory note executed by
ITC, it was expressly stipulated that the venue for any legal action that may arise out of the
said Promissory Note shall be Makati to the exclusion of all other courts. D moved to dismiss
on the ground of improper venue. Can PB Com file the collection case in Manila, where the
Surety Agreement is silent on the venue?[165]
145.
Respondent entered into a payroll agreement with the bank. The agreement contained
a venue stipulation which reads thus: In case of litigation, venue shall be in the proper trial
courts of Manila for determination of any and all questions arising here under. A dispute arising
from the payroll agreement between Respondent and the bank ensued. Respondent filed an
..........
Page No. 16

action for damages with the RTC of Quezon City where he resides. The bank filed a motion to
dismiss on the ground of improper venue. Should the motion to dismiss be granted?[166]
146.

When may the ground of improper venue be raised by the defendant?[167]

147.
[168]

May the trial court dismiss a complaint motu propio on the ground of improper venue?

148.

What civil cases are governed by the Rule o Summary Procedure?[169]

149.

What are the pleadings allowed under the Rule on Summary Procedure?[170]

150.
What are the prohibited pleadings, motions, and petitions under the Rule on Summary
Procedure?[171]
151.
In an ejectment case, the court dismissed the complaint for failure of the plaintiff to
appear during the preliminary conference. The plaintiff filed a motion for reconsideration of the
dismissal order. The defendant contends that the dismissal had become final and executory since
the motion for reconsideration is a prohibited pleading and hence does not suspend the
reglementary period to appeal. Is the Defendants contention correct?[172] Explain.
152.
P filed with the MeTC of Manila a suit against D to collect the sum of P100,000. The
MeTC rendered judgment in favor of P. D appealed to the RTC which affirmed the challenged
decision. D filed with the CA a motion for extension of 15 days to file a petition for review. May
P in the meantime move for the execution of the judgment as a matter of right?[173] Explain.
153.

What cases are governed by the Rule of Procedure for Small Claims Cases?[174]

154.

When shall the MTC apply the Rule of procedure for Small Claims Cases?[175]

155.

Are the Rules of Civil Procedure applicable to small claims cases?[176]

156.

What are the prohibited pleadings and motions in small claims cases?[177]

157.

Are decisions in small claims cases appealable?[178]

158.

Define pleadings.[179]

159.

What are the pleading allowed by the Rules of Court?[180]

160.

What is a complaint?[181]

161.

What is an answer?[182]

162.
Co Batong, a Taipan, filed a civil action for damages with the Regional Trial Court
(RTC) of Paraaque City against Jose Penduko, a news reporter of the Philippine Times, a
newspaper of general circulation printed and published in Paraaque City. The complaint
alleged, among others, that Jose Penduko wrote malicious and defamatory imputations against
Co Batong; that Co Batongs business address is in Makati City; and that the libelous article was
first printed and published in Paraaque City. The complaint prayed that Jose Penduko be held
liable to pay P200,000.00, as moral damages; P150,000.00, as exemplary damages; and
..........
Page No. 17

P50,000.00, as attorneys fees. Jose Penduko filed a Motion to Dismiss on the following
grounds: 1. The RTC is without jurisdiction because under the Totality Rule, the claim for
damages in the amount of P350,000.00 fall within the exclusive original jurisdiction of the
Metropolitan Trial Court (MeTC) of Paraaque City. 2. The venue is improperly laid because
what the complaint alleged is Co Batongs business address and not his residence address. Are
the grounds invoked in the Motion to Dismiss proper?[183]
163.

What are the kinds of defenses?[184] Define and Explain.

164.

Give examples of affirmative defenses.[185]

165.
P filed a complaint against B and C who are made co-defendants. C files an answer
serving a copy thereof upon P. Does C also need to serve a copy upon B?[186] Explain.
166.

What is a counterclaim?[187]

167.
P files a case against D. D files a counterclaim against P. May P file a counterclaim
against Ds counterclaim?[188] Explain.
168.
The Republic, through the PCCG and with the assistance of the Office of the Solicitor
General, filed with the Sandiganbayan a complaint against Cojuangco and Enrile for
reconveyance and damages. Subsequently Enrile was granted leave of court to implead Solicitor
General Chavez as a defendant in a counterclaim for filing a harassment suit. Was the filing of
the counterclaim against OSG Chavez proper?[189] Explain.
169.
Is there an instance wherein a counterclaim may be asserted by the defending party
against one who is not an opposing party?[190] Explain.
170.

What are the kinds of counterclaims?[191]

171.

What is a compulsory counterclaim?[192]

172.

Distinguish a compulsory counterclaim from a permissive counterclaim.[193]

173.

Why is a compulsory counterclaim termed as such?[194]

174.

What is the reason behind S2R9?[195]

175.

How should a compulsory counterclaim or crossclaim be set up?[196]

176.

May a compulsory counterclaim be set up in a motion to dismiss?[197] Explain.

177.
What are the requirements in order that a counterclaim may be considered
compulsory?[198] Explain.
178.
P files a suit for sum of money in the sum of P500,000 against D in the RTC of
Ozamis City. Assuming that Ds counterclaim arises out of or is connected to the transaction or
occurrence constituting the subject matter of Ps claim, can D file a counterclaim: (a) For
ejectment?[199] (b) For support?[200] (c) For sum of money in the sum of P250,000?[201] (d)
For infringement of Ds patent?[202] And (e) For delivery of title over a subdivision lot which P,
as a subdivision developer, sold to D?[203]
..........
Page No. 18

179.
P filed a suit for nullification of a promissory note against D on the ground of usurious
and unconscionable interest rates. D counterclaimed for the payment of the P1M loan with
interest. He however did not pay the docket fees. Should the counterclaim be dismissed for
failure to pay docket fees?[204] Explain.
180.
F filed a collection suit for P387,000 against R in the RTC of Davao City. Aside from
alleging payment as a defense, R in his answer set up counterclaims for P100,000 as damages
and P30,000 as attorneys fees as a result of the baseless filing of the complaint, as well as for
P250,000 as the balance of the purchase price of 30 units of airconditioners he sold to F. Does
RTC have jurisdiction over Rs counterclaims and if so does he have to pay docket fees
therefore?[205] Explain.
181.
D and P entered into a lease contract whereby D leased Room 401 to P. P was of the
impression that the lease also covered the rooftop of Room 442. However D padlocked the way
to the rooftop. D insisted that the lease only covered Room 401 and that Ps use of the rooftop
was merely tolerated. P tendered the lease payment to D who refused to accept the same. P then
filed an action for consignation with the MTC against D. D then filed an answer with
counterclaim for unlawful detainer against P. The CA ruled that the raising of the counterclaim
for ejectment was improper since such could only be initiated by a verified complaint pursuant to
S4R70. Was the filing of the counterclaim proper?[206] Explain.
182.
P filed with the MeTC of Makati a complaint against D to recover possession of a
parcel of land with an assessed value of P60,000. D filed an answer. The MeTC tried the case on
the merits and rendered a decision in favor of P. D appealed to the RTC. Assume the RTC does
not dismiss the appeal and proceed to take cognizance thereof. D filed a motion to admit
amended answer in which he raises a counterclaim for P250,000 against P which arose out of the
same transaction subject matter of the complaint. May the court admit the amended answer?
[207] Explain.
183.
P filed with the RTC an action for recovery of land against D. D filed an answer
raising the defense of ownership. RTC decided for D. On appeal the CA reversed the RTC and
decided for P declaring him as owner of the land and ordering D to vacate the land. The CA
declared that there was no fraud or bad faith on the part of D. the CAs judgment became final
and executory. P moved for the execution of the judgment before the RTC. D opposed on the
ground that a hearing supplementary to the execution should be conducted to allow them to
present evidence to prove that they are builders in good faith and to prove the value of the
improvements. (a) Should the RTC grant the opposition of D?[208] (b) May D file a separate
action to recover the value of the improvements introduced by them?[209] Explain.
184.
A sues L for recovery of a parcel of land. L seeks in turn to be reimbursed of the value
of improvements she had introduced on the same land and the payment of damages she had
sustained. Should L file a separate action against A for that purpose?[210] Explain.
185.
Would the dismissal of the main complaint also result in the dismissal of the
counterclaim?[211] Explain.
186.
What is the compelling test of compulsoriness to determine whether a claim is
compulsory?[212] Explain.

..........
Page No. 19

187.
FBC was engaged by U to construct a multi-level apartment building in Forbes Park.
Forbes Park Association (FPA) suspended all entry permits of the construction after discovering
that the same was violative of the subdivisions deed of restriction. FBC filed an action for
injunction and damages against FPA. FPA filed a motion to dismiss on the ground that U, not
FBC was the real party in interest. It was granted which became final. Later on FPA filed an
action against FBC to remove the structures it built and for damages. (a) If you were the counsel
for FBC, what would you do?[213] Explain. (b) If you were the counsel for FPA, instead of
filing a motion to dismiss, what would you have done?[214] Explain. (c) Assume that no motion
to dismiss was filed by FBC in the second case and the RTC decided for FPA. On appeal, may
the judgment of the RTC in the second case be set aside?[215] Explain.
188.
P sues D who moves to dismiss for failure of the complaint to state a cause of action.
The motion is granted and the case dismissed. The dismissal became final. Then, d sues P on a
claim arising out of the same transaction or occurrence as Ps earlier attempted claim. P defends
on the ground that Ds claim is precluded by his failure to raise it as a counterclaim in the first
action. Is Ps defense meritorious?[216] Explain.
189.
Fe filed a collection suit for P387,000 against Ramon in the RTC of Davao City. Aside
from alleging payment as a defense, Ramon in his answer ser up counterclaims for P100,000 as
damages and P30,000 as attorneys fees as a result of the baseless filing of the complaint, as well
as for P250,000 as the balance of the purchase price of 30 units of airconditioners he sold to Fe.
(a) Suppose Ramons counterclaim for the unpaid balance is P310,000, what will happen to his
counterclaims if the court dismisses the complaint after holding a preliminary hearing on
Ramons affirmative defense?[217] (b) Under the same premise as paragraph (b) above, suppose
that instead of alleging payment as a defense in his answer, Ramon filed a motion to dismiss on
that ground, at the same time setting up his counterclaims, and the court grants his motion. What
will happen to his counterclaims?[218] Explain.
190.
Petitioner filed a complaint for consolidation of title over land sold to him by
Respondent under a pacto de retro sale. Respondent filed an answer with counterclaim asking
that Petitioner receive P810 and that the pacto de retro sale be declared as an equitable mortgage.
Petitioner did not file an answer to the Respondents counterclaim. Upon motion, the trial court
declared Petitioner in default as to Respondents counterclaim and rendered judgment in favor of
Respondent. Did the trial court properly declare petitioner in default in respect of Respondents
counterclaim?[219] Explain.
191.
Plaintiff filed a complaint against defendant for recovery of possession of real
property with the Regional Trial Court of Manila. Defendant filed an answer with affirmative
defenses and interposed a counterclaim of damages and attorneys fees arising from the filing of
the complaint. When plaintiff failed to file an answer on the counterclaim, defendant moved to
declare him in default. Notwithstanding notice of the motion, plaintiff did not file an opposition.
As judge, how would you resolve the motion to declare plaintiff in default?[220] Explain.
192.
P filed against D an action for recovery of ownership and possession of a parcel of
land. D filed an answer alleging that he was a possessor in good faith and thus had a right of
retention. D counterclaimed for reimbursement of the value of the useful improvements he had
introduced on the land. P did not file an answer to Ds counterclaim. D filed a motion to declare
P in default as to his counterclaim. Should the court grant Ds motion?[221] Explain.
..........
Page No. 20

193.

L obtained a series of loans from Banco De Oro for which he executed three REMs. L

defaulted on the 3rd loan and BDO extrajudicially foreclosed the REM on the 1st and 3rd loan.
Two days before the scheduled public auction. L filed with the RTC of Quezon City a complaint
for specific performances, torts, and damages against BDO for including the 1 st REM in
foreclosure. BDO filed an answer with counterclaim. BDO countered that there is a cross-default
provision in the loan contracts that justifies the inclusion of properties in the 1 st REM in the
foreclosure. BDO counterclaimed for attorneys fees on the ground that the suit was malicious
and baseless. The auction sale proceeded but the proceeds realized therefrom were not sufficient
to answer for Ls loan obligation. BDO sent a demand letter to L to pay the deficiency but this
was not heeded by L. L filed a motion to admit supplemental complaint which averred that BDO
had proceeded with the auction sale. The trial court admitted the supplemental complaint.
Subsequently, during the pendency of Ls complaint, BDO filed with the RTC of Mandaluyong
against L a collection case for the deficiency for which L filed a motion to dismiss on the ground
that the collection case is a compulsory counterclaim that should have been set up in Ls
complaint for tort and damages since it arose from the same loan transaction. Should Ls motion
to dismiss the collection case be granted? [222] Explain.
194.

What is cross-claim?[223]

195.
D and E are solidarily indebted to P for P500,000. P filed a collection case against D
and E for P500,000. D filed his answer in which he alleged that he had already paid P500,000 to
P prior to the filling of the complaint. Judgment rendered in favor of D and E dismissing Ps
complaint, the court finding that D had already paid P even prior to the filing of the case. The
judgment became final and executor. D then files an action to collect P250,000 from E as
reimbursement. E files a motion to dismiss on the ground that D should have filed his claim as a
cross-claim in the collection case filed by P. Should the court grant the motion to dismiss? [224]
Explain.
196.

Is there such a thing as a permissive cross-claim?[225] Explain.

197.
D and E are jointly and severally indebted to P under a promissory note for P500,000.
P sues D and E before the RTC. D filed a cross-claim against E to recover P450,000 arising from
the non-payment of the price of a car sold and delivered by D to E. E files a motion to dismiss
the cross-claim. Should the court grant the motion to dismiss?[226] Explain.
198.
P filed a case against D and E. D filed a cross-claim against E. E did not answer the
cross-claim. May D move to declare E in default of the cross-claim?[227] Explain.
199.
P filed a case against D and E. D filed a cross-claim against E. May E in his answer to
the cross-claim, assert a counterclaim against Ds cross-claim?[228] Explain.
200.
D and E are solidarily indebted to P for P500,000. P filed a collection case against D
and E for P500,000. D and E filed their answer alleging the defense of prescription. Judgment
rendered in favor of P and the same became final and executory. D pays the P500,000 to the
sheriff. D then files an action to collect P250,000 from E. E files a motion to dismiss on the
ground that D should have filed his claim as a cross-claim in the collection case filed by P.
should the court grant the motion to dismiss?[229] Explain.

..........
Page No. 21