Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
2001 Edition <draft copy. pls. check for errors> Summary Judgments
Rule 35
SUMMARY JUDGMENTS
For summary judgment to be proper, two (2) requisites must concur, to wit:
1. there must be no genuine issue on any material fact, except for the amount
of damages; and
2. the moving party must be entitled to a judgment as a matter of law.
When on their face, the pleadings tender a genuine issue, summary judgment
is not proper. An issue is genuine if it requires the presentation of evidence as
distinguished from a sham, fictitious, contrived or false claim. (Ontimare vs. Elep
GR No. 159224, January 20, 2006)
Even if the answer does tender an issue, and therefore a judgment on the
pleadings is not proper, a summary judgment may still be rendered if the issues
renderer are not genuine, set-up in bad faith and patently insubstantial (Vergara
vs. Suelto GR No. L-74766, Dec. 21, 1987)
Lakas Atenista 60
Ateneo de Davao University College of Law
1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 35
2001 Edition <draft copy. pls. check for errors> Summary Judgments
pleadings and papers filed, the court finds that there is no genuine issue as
to any material fact except as to the amount of damages (Ley Construction
and Development Corporation vs. Union Bank GR No. 133801’ June 27,
2000; Spouses Agbada vs. Inter-Urban developers Inc., GR No. 1445029,
September 19, 2000; Raboca vs. Velez 341 SCERA 543). Under the Rules,
when there is no genuine issue as to any material fact, other than for
instance, the amount of damages, and the moving party is entitled to a
judgment as a matter of law, a summary judgment may be rendered.
2. What triggers a summary judgment is the absence of a genuine factual
issue. It is not proper where there are factual issues to be resolved by the
presentation of evidence. Even if there is a complicated question of law if
there is no issue as to the facts, a summary judgment is not barred (Velasco
v. CA 329 SCRA 392; Garcia vs. CA 336 SCRA 475).
3. In an action for foreclosure of mortgage for example, the material issues are
the existence of the debt and its demandability. When the defendant admits
the existence of the debt and raises an issue as to the demandability of the
debt or the interest rate involved because of an alleged contemporaneous
agreement between the parties, the issue tendered is sham, fictitious, or
patently unsubstantial. A summary judgment would be proper because
there is no genuine issue (Sps. Agbada vs. Inter-Urban Developers Inc.,
supra)
Where only the genuineness and due execution of the promissory note are the
matters deemed admitted for the failure of the defendant to deny the same under
oath, a summary judgment is not proper.
In an action for a sum of money, where the debt and the fact of its non-payment
is admitted and the only issue raised is the rate of interest and the damages
payable, there is no genuine issue and a summary judgment may be rendered
upon proper motion.
5. The trial court cannot motu proprio decide that summary judgment on an
action is in order. Under the applicable provisions of Rule 35, the
defending party or the claimant, as the case may be, must invoke the rule
on summary judgment by filing a motion. The adverse party must be
notified of the motion for summary judgment and furnished with
supporting affidavits, depositions or admissions before hearing is
conducted. More importantly, a summary judgment is permitted only if
there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and a moving party is
entitled to a judgment as a matter of law (Pineda vs. Heirs of Eliseo
Guevara GR No. 143188, February 14, 2007).
For EXAMPLE: I will file a collection case against you and then you claim that
you have paid already. But in reality, it is not paid. So I know that you are lying.
Ikaw naman na defendant, you know also that you are lying, what you are after
is to prolong the case.
Now, if you are the defendant and you received a copy of my motion, you can
oppose my motion for summary judgment where you will say, “No! I paid and my
defense is genuine!” The defendant must also execute an affidavit to support his
position. So you will say under oath that you paid me.
That is summary judgment where the court will say, “No more trial. The
affidavit will take the place of evidence in court.” That is what the rule is all about.
Now take note, there is no genuine issue because if you look at the complaint
and the answer there is an issue because the answer alleges payment. That is an
issue. But in reality that is a false issue. That is why it is not a genuine issue.
Some text writers call the law on summary judgment another name – it is
known as the law on Accelerated Judgment. Meaning, the process will accelerate,
you can easily go to trial. Instead of going to trial, there is no more trial. The
motion for summary judgment will determine who is telling the truth and who is
not telling the truth…immediately. So at least, the delay has been avoided.
What is the example I gave you, no? “A party seeking to recover a claim…”
Ako, I will file against you a case of recovery of an unpaid debt. “or cross-claim
etc. at any time after the pleading if answer thereto has been served…” meaning , after
your answer has been served, I will move with supporting affidavits, depositions
or admissions for a summary judgment in my favor.
Just like in the previous rule (Judgment on the Pleadings) in certain types of
cases like declaration of nullity of marriage, annulment of marriage, legal
separation, based on the same principle that there must always be a trial in these
cases, where a ground was established based on the same principle of analogy.
Lakas Atenista 64
Ateneo de Davao University College of Law
1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 35
2001 Edition <draft copy. pls. check for errors> Summary Judgments
Test: Whether or not the pleadings, affidavits and exhibits in support of the
motion are sufficient to oversome the opposing papers and to justify the finding
that, as a matter of law, there is no defense to the action or claim is clearly
meritorious (estrada vs. Consolacion, et al., GR No. L-40948 June 29, 1976).
Normally, the party who avails of summary judgment is the plaintiff. But this
remedy is not limited to the plaintiff. The defendant can also file a motion for
Summary Judgment against the plaintiff because the cause of action is sham. SO,
if the remedy of Summary Judgment is available to the plaintiff, it can also be
availed by the defendant. How?
EXAMPLE: You file a complaint against me. Of course, your complaint puts
up a cause of action, but I know very well that your cause of action is false,
although it’s very rare, usually it is the defendant who is delaying the case. Well,
I could always file an answer and there would be pre-trial but sabi ko, “Matagal
pa iyon!” So under Section 2, instead of filing an answer, I can file a motion for
Summary Judgment and I will attach to my motion affidavits to show that the
cause of action is not genuine. And if the plaintiff believes that his cause of
action is genuine, he might as well oppose my motion with counter-affidavits.
Now, if you will not, then the court will rule in my favor, dismissing your
complaint.
If I will file a motion for Summary Judgment, I must set it for a hearing just
like any other motion. Now, generally, if I will file a motion for Summary
Judgment, you must be served a copy at least 10 days before the hearing. That’s
an exception to the general rule in Rule 15 (general rule: you are only required to
give the other party 3 days).
The reason is the other party should also be given time to oppose it with
affidavits. That’s why you have to give him a longer period to oppose and if he
decides to oppose, he must also file his opposition together with affidavits but he
must furnish me with his copy of opposition at least 3 days before the hearing.
Under the rule on deposition, I can take the deposition of my own opponent
and based on your deposition, I can prove that your defense is false. So
depositions can be used not only during the trial but to support or oppose a
motion for Summary Judgment.
So, depositions can be used at the trial or upon the hearing of a motion.
Q: Give examples of a motion where you can use a deposition to support your
motion.
A: The following:
Lakas Atenista 66
Ateneo de Davao University College of Law
1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 35
2001 Edition <draft copy. pls. check for errors> Summary Judgments
1.) a motion for Summary Judgment. Under Rule 35, the motion should be
supported by affidavits, depositions, etc… based on what the other
party will admit. And based on Rule 23 Section 4, the deposition of the
adverse party may be used for any purpose. So I can use it to prove that
your cause of action or defense is false, or another way of supporting a
motion for Summary Judgment under Rule 35, affidavits, depositions
and admissions.
2.) Rule 26 – Request for Admission – I can avail of the Mode of the Request
for Admission based on your admissions.
According to Section 3, all the issues which are not genuine can be resolved
immediately EXCEPT as to amount of damages. Meaning the amount of damages
to be recovered by the plaintiff cannot be adjudicated through a motion for
Summary Judgment because you still have to present evidence as to how much
really is the damages.
Practically every issue can be resolved summarily except the exact amount of
damages. Some people find this hard to imagine, “Paano ba yon? I will file a
motion for Summary Judgment and then there will be a judgment except as to the
amount of damages? Ano ba ‘yan?”
If you will notice, the issue as to the fact that damages, especially unliquidated
damages,which is also subject to proof, is also mentioned in Rule 8, Section 11:
Meaning, how much are you entitled cannot be just given to you even if your
opponent will not deny an allegation. You must still prove it and that is very
clear even in Rule 35 – summary judgment can be granted except as to the
amount of damages.
Lakas Atenista 67
Ateneo de Davao University College of Law
1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 35
2001 Edition <draft copy. pls. check for errors> Summary Judgments
Lakas Atenista 68
Ateneo de Davao University College of Law
1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 35
2001 Edition <draft copy. pls. check for errors> Summary Judgments
What does that mean? Suppose the case will go to trial, so the witness will
take the witness stand. He will testify. When a witness testifies under the Rules
on Evidence, there must be a showing that what he is talking about is known by
him. Otherwise, it will be hearsay. And based on the law of evidence, the
testimony is inadmissible. What I will say should be admissible under the law on
evidence otherwise my testimony will not be allowed and I must show that I’m
in a position to know what I’m talking about.
That’s what the witness will have to demonstrate in court. Since in a motion
for Summary Judgment, there is no more trial, there is no more witnesses who
will testify in court, what will take the place of a witness is his affidavit which
must also show that the witness has personal knowledge, etc. Meaning, what
you should show during the trial, if you are, they must also be shown in your
affidavit.
If your testimony in court is not admissible, because you are telling only what
you heard from other people, then an affidavit which contains the same thing
would also be inadmissible. So, in other words, the affidavit merely takes the
place of oral testimony in court.
Q: What procedure is similar where the one who will decide, who will only
read the affidavits of both sides and render a decision?
A: Criminal Procedure: Rule 112 on Preliminary Investigation – the fiscal
conducts a preliminary investigation on the affidavits lang. The complainant will
submit his affidavit. The respondent will file his counter-affidavit. Then the
fiscal will go over the affidavits and will resolve the issues and determine
whether there is probable cause to file the information or none. So, the
resolution is practically based on affidavits. So walang hearing.
Lakas Atenista 69
Ateneo de Davao University College of Law
1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 35
2001 Edition <draft copy. pls. check for errors> Summary Judgments
Well, of course, the affidavits required by law must be filed in good faith.
Sanctions:
Q: What is the penalty for you for filing earlier an opposition to my motion
supported by affidavits in bad faith?
A: The court may:
a.) order you or counsel to pay to me (plaintiff) the amount of reasonable
expense which the filing of affidavits caused me to incur, including attorney’s
fees; and
b.) after hearing, adjudge you or your lawyer guilty of contempt.
Additionally a case of perjury against can be filed against the affiant for
executing a false statement.
That is a criminal sanction under the RPC. I can also file a case of disbarment
against the lawyer for assisting in the filing of an affidavit in bad faith.
So in other words, if you execute an affidavit in bad faith, you must be ready
to face all these later – damages, contempt, perjury under the RPC and the
lawyer to face disciplinary proceedings.
Lakas Atenista 70
Ateneo de Davao University College of Law
1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 35
2001 Edition <draft copy. pls. check for errors> Summary Judgments
Their similarity is that, both of them are methods for promptly disposing civil
actions, wherein a civil case can be adjudicated without undergoing any trial.
Lakas Atenista 71
Ateneo de Davao University College of Law
1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 35
2001 Edition <draft copy. pls. check for errors> Summary Judgments
Lakas Atenista 72
Ateneo de Davao University College of Law
1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 35
2001 Edition <draft copy. pls. check for errors> Summary Judgments
But there are three (3) known exceptions where a motion can already pray for
immediate relief. They are:
1.) Rule 33 – Demurrer to evidence;
2.) Rule 34 – Judgment on the Pleadings; and
3.) Rule 35 – Summary Judgment.
–oOo-
Lakas Atenista 73
Ateneo de Davao University College of Law