CHAPTER 1.

- INTRODUCTION

During the term of Chief Justice Artemio Panganiban, his main concern in the acute judiciary
problem is what he calls it ACID, i.e., (1) Access to justice by the poor is limited due to financial
constraint, (2) Corruption, (3) Incompetence of [some] judges in the conduct of hearing and
rendition of judgments, and (4) Delay in the delivery of quality judgments.

To avoid this ACID, as an alternative to court litigations, came into existence of the Alternative
Dispute Resolution (ADR) system with which the disputing parties can voluntary agree to settle
their dispute without court intervention (that is the controversy without even reaching the court)
through any of the several means under the ADR system such as under Republic Act 9285 known
as ADRA of 2004 where it comprises conciliation, mediation, arbitration, early neutral
evaluation, mini-trial and any combination thereof (e.g., mediation-arbitration) - and among
the ADR system, mediation and arbitration are the most popular.

There was a controversy worth P2.5 billion involving Pacific Plaza Towers, Inc. built in Fort
Bonifacio by Metro Pacific Corporation where it was resolved through out-of-court ADR system
within a month. Same happened to another controversy also worth P2.5 billion which is the
Skyway Project in Alabang and was likewise resolved within a month through out-of-court ADR
system. So, you can now realize the huge benefits just how fast, economical and convenient a
controversy can be settled through out-of-court ADR system instead of judicial process where it
could have dragged for many years or who knows because of huge amount of money involved it
could have been pending to this date.

Now, don't be confused, there are types of dispute resolution system in the Philippines which is
either voluntary or mandatory for the parties to undergo - which can be conciliation, arbitration,
mediation, mini-trial, early neutral evaluation or any combination thereof. However, the most
popular are mediation and arbitration.

 TYPES of DISPUTE RESOLUTION SYSTEMS IN THE PHILIPPINES

1. Mandatory Dispute Resolution Systems
Being mandatory, it is an ADR System such that the disputants have no choice except to have
their dispute undergo ADR System. There are three mandatory dispute resolution Systems:
a. Katarungang Pambarangay (under Republic Act 7160 otherwise known as Local
Government Code)
Mandatory ADR system such that under Section 412 (a) LGC no complaint, action,
petition, or proceeding involving any dispute within the authority of the Lupon shall be
filed directly in court or any other government office for adjudication, unless there has
been a MEDIATION (i.e., a particular type of ADR system) between disputants to be
conducted by the Punong Barangay, and if the latter is not successful, the controversy
shall go through the Lupon Tagapamayapa. And under Section 408 LGC: Subject matter
of mediation under the Lupon Tagapamayapa
The Lupon Tagapamayapa has the power/authority to mediate parties residing in the
same city/municipality ALL disputes - EXCEPT:
(1) One party is the government agency, subdivision or instrumentality
(2) One party is a public officer/employee where dispute relates to performance of his
official function
(3) Dispute involving real properties (i.e., real action) located in different
cities/municipalities - unless parties agree to submit their dispute for mediation by
the proper Lupon Tagapamayapa
(4) Dispute involving parties (i.e., personal action) who actually reside in barangays of
different cities/municipalities - unless such barangays where parties reside adjoin
each other and the parties agree to submit their dispute for mediation by proper
Lupon Tagapamayapa
(5) Crime with imposable penalty exceeding one (1) year or exceeding P5,000 fine
(6) Crime where there is no private offended party (e.g., victimless crimes meaning there
is no private offended party such as illegal possession of firearms/dangerous drugs)
(7) Other disputes that the President may determine
HOWEVER: There are exceptions where the action can be filed directly in court without
first undergoing mediation before the Lupon for under Section 412 (b) LGC it provides, (a)
where the accused is presently detained, (b) where the person deprived of his liberty
proper for habeas corpus, (c) when the action is coupled with provisional remedies such
as injunction, attachment, delivery of personal property or support pendent lite, and (d)
when the action would be barred by statute of limitation if the case will undergo
barangay mediation
Note: RA 7160 Sec. 410. Procedure for Amicable Settlement: (c) Suspension of
prescriptive period of offenses. — While the dispute is under mediation,
conciliation, or arbitration, the prescriptive periods for offenses and cause of
action under existing laws shall be interrupted upon filing of the complaint with
the punong barangay. The prescriptive periods shall resume upon receipt by the
complainant of the complaint or the certificate of repudiation or of the certification
 to file action issued by the lupon or pangkat secretary: Provided, however, That
such interruption shall not exceed sixty (60) days from the filing of the complaint
with the punong barangay.
Note (*): How do you enforce compromise agreement between disputants successfully
mediated through Punong Barangay or Lupon Tagapamaya? (BAR 2012)
If any of the disputants did not repudiate within 10 days the dispute successfully settled
in the barangay level reckoned from the date of execution of the amicable settlement -
then such amicably settled dispute can be enforced by:
(1) Within 6 months from the date the parties executed the amicable settlement of their
dispute, file Motion (for the execution of the settled dispute) with the Lupon
Tagapamayapa; or
(2) After the lapse of said 6 months, file an action with MTC
HOWEVER: If any of the disputants repudiated the settlement within 10 days from the
execution of the settlement, then the repudiator can file a "statement" sworn before and
with the Lupon Chairman - by reason that his consent was obtained through fraud,
intimidation, or violence, which repudiation shall render the Punong Barangay to issue a
Certificate to File Action
b. (*) Court-annexed Mediation (this is type of ADR though technically we call it Judicial
Dispute Resolution [JDR])
This is another compulsory ADR system via an order issued by the court during pre-trial
stage of the action ordering the parties to go to the Philippine Mediation Center (PMC)
for them to undergo mediation (for the possible peaceful settlement of their controversy).
This compulsory judicial mediation includes: (BAR 2013)
1. ALL civil cases including special proceeding particularly settlement of estates (e.g.,
judicial partition of estate) - EXCEPT when the Complaint filed with court is coupled
with provisional remedy such as preliminary injunction, (preliminary) attachment,
delivery of personal property (replevin [Rule 60 ROC]) or support pendent lite (Rule 61
ROC). But there are civil cases/special proceedings which by law cannot undergo JDR
as they cannot be compromised such as under Article 2035 of NCC which provides:
a. Civil status of a person
b. Validity of a marriage or a legal separation
However, the disputants can inform the court that they agree to undergo
mediation which the court shall abide but only some aspects such as custody of
minor children, separation of property, support pendent lite
c. Future support
d. Future legitime
 2. On criminal cases - but only on the:
a. Civil aspect (because crime cannot be compromised) of criminal cases where the
imposable penalty not exceed 6 years imprisonment. However judicial mediation
is not required to victimless crimes
b. Civil aspect of quasi-offenses under RPC (e.g., reckless imprudence resulting to
physical injury or damage to property)
c. Civil aspect of theft (not qualified theft), estafa (not syndicated or large scale
esafa), libel and BP 22
Now: On crime involving violation of Republic Act 9262 (Violence Against Women and
Children [VAWC]), the court cannot mandate the accused and the private offended
party to undergo compulsory mediation - UNLESS: They agree and inform the court
that they would like to undergo mediation - BUT ONLY: On matters involving custody
of minor children, separation of property, support pendent lite
(*) There are three stages of JDR System: (BAR 2012)
a. First stage: The court of origin whether MTC/RTC (as the case maybe) during pre-
trial stage, order the parties to undergo mediation before the PMC to be officiated
by accredited mediators
b. Second stage: If the parties fail to settle during the first stage, the JDR Judge of
the PMC becomes the mediator-conciliator-early neutral evaluator. If this second
stage still fails, then the JDR Judge shall return the case back to the court of origin
(MTC/RTC as the case maybe) who will now continue with the pre-trial, proceed
with the trial until Judgment
c. Third stage: When the defeated party appeals the case to RTC (from MTC) / CA
(from RTC), as the case maybe, the RTC/CA (as the case maybe) shall refer the case
to PMC-ACM (Appeals Court Mediation) for another round of mediation, and if still
not settled, then the appellate court shall decide the appeal
c. Arbitration for labor cases (Presidential Decree 442)
In labor cases, an ADR system particularly arbitration is mandatory, the reason why a
labor complainant files his labor complaint with the Regional Arbitration Board (RAB),
whose arbitral decision is appealable to NLRC located Quezon City (Note: The decision of
the NLRC is not appealable because its decision is final and executory – so the remedy
against NLRC decision is not appeal but an action in itself which is a Special Civil Action
via Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65 filed with the Court of Appeals – and when the
action from NLRC reaches the CA, the nature of the action is no longer ADR but an action
via judicial intervention)
 Note: The first two mandatory ADR systems which are Katarungang Pambarangay and JDR
are mediations where the mediator does not render decision but only facilitate way to make
the parties settle their dispute amicably. The third ADR system by the RAB is arbitration where
the labor arbiter of the RAB renders a binding arbitral decision (though appealable to NLRC)
2. Voluntary Dispute Resolution Systems
What makes it voluntary dispute resolution system is because the adversarial parties are not
mandated by law to have their controversy undergo any of the proper ADR system – but the
parties can voluntarily agree to have their controversy undergo any of the ADR system. And
once the parties so agreed, then it becomes a binding agreement and such agreement now
becomes their own private law and so therefore becomes mandatory for them to comply in
good faith
a. The Arbitration Law (R.A. 876; Domestic Arbitration Law)
This is an ADR system particularly arbitration where the adversarial parties can
voluntarily agree to have their dispute undergo arbitration. Under Section 2 of RA 876
includes “any domestic” controversy (i.e., domestic controversy refers to local dispute
between disputants within the Philippines [not international controversy]), including
dispute on contracts - EXCEPT: Arbitration on labor actions which is under the exclusive
jurisdiction of the RAB-NLRC
Note: Another exception though it is a domestic controversy is the arbitration on
construction dispute pursuant to EO 1008 Section 4 - where it is the CIAC (Construction
Industry Arbitration Commission ) has the exclusive jurisdiction thereof
b. Construction Industry Arbitration Law (E.O 1008)
This is an ADR system particularly arbitration where the adversarial parties can
voluntarily agree to have their dispute undergo arbitration under the original and
exclusive jurisdiction of Construction Industry Arbitration Commission (CIAC) This is
arbitration refers any breach of contract regarding any construction conducted in the
Philippines whether between private disputants or when one of the parties is a
government
c. ADR System by Solicitor General
This is an ADR system where the adversarial parties particularly between National
Government Agencies (e.g., between DENR vs. DAR) can voluntarily agree to have their
dispute resolved by the SolGen under the ADR system which the SolGen deems best
whether mediation, arbitration, or early neutral evaluation
d. Alternative Dispute Resolution Act of 2004 (R.A. 9285; ADRA)
This is a general law applicable to all forms of voluntary ADR systems in the Philippines -
viz., it unifies all forms of voluntary ADR Systems (not JDR) existing in the Philippines such
 as mediation, conciliation, arbitration, early neutral evaluation, mini-trial or any
combination thereof (e.g., mediation-arbitration), including the adoption of UNCITRAL
Model Law into the Philippines (United Nations Commission on International Trade Law)
pertaining to dispute that is both commercial and international in nature. ADRA repeals
some provisions of other ADR system existing in the Philippines (such RA 876 known as
Arbitration Law, EO 1008 known as Construction Industry Arbitration Law) - but only on
those provisions inconsistent with ADRA

CHAPTER 2. - FUNDAMENTALS OF ADR under ADRA

 DEFINITION OF ADR SYSTEM (Section 3 [a] ADRA [R.A. 9285])

Any process where the adversarial parties can voluntarily agree to settle their dispute
outside judicial or quasi-judicial (e.g., NLRC) – where the parties can choose whether by
mediation, conciliation, arbitration, early neutral evaluation, mini-trial or any combination
thereof (e.g., mediation-arbitration) and to be presided by a neutral 3rd person (e.g.,
conciliator, mediator, arbitrator, etc. as the case may be)

 MEDIATION (Section 3 [q] ADRA in relation to Article 1.6 B [6] DOJ IRR)
A form of ADR system where disputants voluntarily agree to settle their dispute through
mediation (i.e., such agreement called "mediation agreement") to be presided by the
mediator chosen by the parties – to be conducted according to the rules agreed upon by the
parties, or in absence/default of such agreement in accordance with the ADRA and DOJ IRR.
The role of the mediator is not to make decision but rather to assist/help the parties (by
convincing them) to enter into amicable settlement (Note: Mediation is a process that is non-
merit based where the mediator will not delve on the factual and legal issues of the dispute
- unlike arbitration, med-arb, early neutral evaluation and mini-trial)
1. CONCILIATION
Mediation includes conciliation (Section 7 ADRA; i.e., mediation and conciliation have
almost similar function).
 What makes then conciliation somehow different from mediation
First: In conciliation, the disputants voluntarily agree to settle their dispute through
conciliation to be presided by the conciliator - WHILE: In mediation, the disputants
voluntarily agree to settle their dispute through mediation to be presided by the
mediator
Second: In conciliation, the conciliator proposes how to resolve the dispute - WHILE:
In mediation, the disputants themselves propose how to resolve their dispute where
 the role of the mediator is merely to facilitate the settlement of the dispute. In other
words, the conciliator plays more active role than the mediator

 ARBITRATION (Section 3 [d] ADRA; Article 1.6 A [3] DOJ IRR)

Also a form of ADR system where the disputants voluntarily agree to settle their dispute
through arbitration (i.e., such agreement called "arbitration agreement" or "submission
agreement, as the case maybe") to be presided by an arbitrator chosen by the parties (or
chosen in accordance with the Rules agreed upon the parties, or in the absence thereof, in
accordance with the Rules mandated under ADRA/DOJ IRR) whose role (i.e., arbitrator) is to
make a decision based on the merit called "arbitral award" binding upon the parties (Note:
Arbitration is the only ADR system under ADRA that a binding decision is rendered)

 MEDIATION-ARBITRATION (Med-Arb; Note: Section 3 [a] ADRA "or any combination of the
ADR System"; Section 3 [t] in relation with Section 1.6 E[2] DOJ IRR)
Also a form of ADR system where the disputants voluntarily agree to settle their dispute
through Med-Arb - which is a two-phased process, first is the mediation, and if mediation
failed, then arbitration follows

 EARLY NEUTRAL EVALUATION (Section 3 [n] ADRA in relation with Section 1.6 E [1] DOJ IRR)
Also a form of ADR system where disputants voluntarily agree to settle their dispute through
early neutral evaluation (also known as neutral evaluation) to be presided by a neutral
evaluator who is an expert on the subject-matter of the dispute. The neutral evaluator is
chosen by the parties (or if no such agreement, then shall be appointed in accordance with
the DOJ IRR). During the early neutral evaluation, the disputing parties (or their lawyers if any)
shall submit the summary (in the form of Position Paper) to support their respective case
alleging therein relevant facts, issues, and laws, attaching documents and affidavit of
witnesses - afterwhich, the neutral evaluator shall issue a non-binding written
evaluation/assessment of the dispute stating the merits and demerits (strengths and
weaknesses) of the respective case of the parties and the estimated amount of damages that
may be incurred by the possible losing party if the disputants decide to undergo court
litigation. Note: As mentioned, the neutral evaluator must be expert on the subject matter
of the dispute in order for the parties to trust his evaluation/assessment and thereby
encourages amicable settlement.
1. Why it is called "early neutral evaluation"?
 Because it is conducted for a possible amicable settlement of the dispute - before any of
the disputants may decide to file action in court or before any other ADR System
(especially arbitration)

 MINI-TRIAL (Section 3 [u] ADRA in relation Article 1.6 E[3] DOJ IRR and Section 7.7 DOJ IRR):
Also a form of ADR system where disputants voluntarily agree to settle their dispute through
mini-trial to be presided by a panel of 2/more decision makers (with or without the
participation of a moderator who does not participate in the decision making but merely to
preside the mini-trial proceeding as a neutral 3rd person) - where the rules to be observed
depends the agreement of the disputants.
In this kind of ADR System being so-called mini-trial, the decision is therefore based on the
merits, as such the disputants will submit their respective written Summary (i.e., akin to
Position Paper) which shall include the facts, factual issues , legal issues, and the applicable
law and jurisprudence, and attached therewith documents/affidavit supporting their
Summary - and afterwhich, the disputants will present their respective case (in a private and
informal hearing) then afterwhich a rebuttal and sur-rebuttal stage may follow in both stages
the decision makers can ask clarificatory questions, then afterwhich, the decision makers
(will not make decision but rather) shall convince the disputants to settle their dispute
voluntarily (but if there is a neutral 3rd person, he shall also assist the decision makers in
trying to settle the disputants) - and if settlement fails, then the panel of decision makers will
render a non-binding oral opinion (not decision) as regards the outcome/result of the dispute
(and the reason of such outcome/result) in the event that the disputants decide to
subsequently go to court. This non-binding oral opinion by the panel of decision makers could
motivate the disputants to settle. However, any of the parties may ask the panel of decision
makers to issue such non-binding written opinion.

 DISPUTES WHERE ADRA DOES NOT APPLY (Section 6 ADRA)

The following cannot be the subject-matter under ADRA:
(1) Labor dispute (which is under the jurisdiction of RAB-NLRC)
(2) Civil status of person
Note: Civil status refers to marriage status
[single/married/widow/widower/annulled/legally separated], facts of birth (i.e., all those
entries on the certificate of live birth), facts of death (i.e., all those entries on the certificate
of death), legitimation, adoption, naturalization, loss/recovery of citizenship, filiation,
change of name and, civil interdiction after convicted of crime by final judgment (Civil
interdiction is an accessory penalty for a crime consisting of deprivation of marital
 authority, parental authority, guardianship, right to manage property or dispose of it inter
vivos). Civil status also includes capacity of person to marry or to enter into contract,
emancipation, etc.
(3) Validity of marriage (void or voidable)
(4) Ground for legal separation
(5) Jurisdiction of court (court's jurisdiction is a matter of law and not by agreement of
parties)
(6) Future legitime
Reason: How can a party compromise his legitime when it is not yet in existent being
future?
(7) Criminal liability
Reason: Because the complainant is the State (that is why the criminal case is entitled
People of the Philippines vs. Juan Dela Cruz), and the private complainant (e.g., victim)
merely serves as witness for the State.
Note: However, the civil aspect/liability of the criminal action can be compromised on
those allowed by law or the Supreme Court (e.g., civil aspect of criminal cases where the
imposable penalty not exceed 6 years imprisonment, civil aspect of quasi-offenses, BP 22,
estafa [not syndicated or large scale estafa], theft [simple not qualified])
(8) Others that cannot be compromised under the law
Example: Article 2035 of the Civil Code regarding “future support”, hence any settlement
thereon is null and void for being against the law and also public policy

 BASIC TERMINOLOGIES UNDER ADRA

(1) ADR Provider (Section 3 [b] ADRA)
"ADR Provider" refers to a person or an institution accredited under the law to render ADR
service through mediation, conciliation, arbitration, early neutral evaluation , mini-trial or
any combination thereof (e.g., med-arb) - but without prejudice to the right of the
disputants to choose a non-accredited person/institution in rendering ADR service
"ADR Practitioner" refers to a natural person/s who actually act as conciliator, mediator,
arbitrator, 3rd neutral evaluator in early neutral evaluation, or panel of decision makers/3rd
neutral person in mini-trial
(2) Award (Section 3 [f] ADRA)
Refers to arbitral award rendered by arbitrator/s in arbitration
Note: When you see "award" under ADRA, it refers to arbitral award
(3) Commercial arbitration (Section 3 [g] ADRA in relation to Section 21 ADRA and Section 1.6
C[4] DOJ IRR)
Arbitration is "commercial" if the subject matter of the dispute arises from relationship
commercial in nature whether contractual or non-contractual (i.e., non-contractual such as
violation of intellectual property law [e.g., unlawful use of trademark]; cutthroat business
competition, etc.). This dispute that is commercial in nature are the following but not limited
to:
(a) Any trade transaction for the supply of goods/services (i.e., sales), or exchange of
goods/services (i.e., barter)
(b) Distribution agreements (Note: It refers to agreement between supplier and distributor of
goods)
(c) Construction works (Note: This is under the jurisdiction of Construction Industry
Arbitration Commission [CIAC] provided the construction is conducted in the Philippines)
(d) Commercial representation/agency (Note: Agent seeks customers on behalf of his
principal for commercial/business purposes)
(e) Factoring (Note: It refers to a financial transaction where a business sells its accounts
receivables [e.g., invoices, promissory notes, checks, etc. given by debtor] to a person
[factor] at a discounted price – and that the factor (as being now the subrogee) will be the
one to collect from the debtor of the latter's debt in full amount plus damages. Note:
Factoring becomes necessary when a business no longer has sufficient revolving cash
(liquidated assets) to meet business activities)
(f) Leasing
(g) Consulting (Note: It refers to a person [consultant] giving expert advice to a
person/company in connection with business)
(h) Engineering
(i) Licensing (Note: It refers to licensing agreement where licensor gives the licensee the right
to produce and/or sell goods applying the brand name/trademark of the licensor [also
called “franchising”]; e.g., using trademark for Levi's garments, Jollibee franchise)
(j) Investment (Note: It refers to act of investing or committing/entrusting money/property
to another for a future income; e.g., buying stocks in the stock market; Multi-level
Marketing [MLM])
(k) Financing (Note: It refers to providing capital [money] to a person for the latter’s business
or personal use, investment, etc.; e.g., banks lending money to loan borrowers)
(l) Banking (Note: It refers to business conducted by a bank accepting deposits from its
depositors in exchange for interests, and then the bank for its own income later lend the
deposit to its loan borrowers for a higher interest profit or investing it for profit)
(m) Insurance
 (n) Joint venture and other forms of industrial or business cooperation (Note: It refers to
agreement where 2/more parties pooling/combining their resources for business
purposes)
(o) Carriage of goods and/or passengers by air, water or land
 International party (Section 3 [p] ADRA)
Refers to a party-disputant whose place of business is outside Philippines. An
international party may have domestic subsidiary or co-venturer who is doing business
in the Philippines but this domestic subsidiary or co-venturer is not deemed as
international party, viz., they are rather domestic party (as they are doing business in the
Philippines)
Note: "Domestic subsidiary" is a domestic company where more than 40% of its
stocks are owned by foreign company known as parent/holding company.
Example of subsidiary company is the Coca-cola Bottlers Philippine, Inc. whose
parent/holding company is the Coca-cola Company with main office in Delaware,
United States
"Foreign arbitrator" is an arbitrator who is not a Filipino
 Model Law (Section 3 [v] ADRA)
(*) Refers to "Model Law" issued by UNCITRAL (United Nations Commission on
International Trade Law - where several countries have adopted including the Philippines)
which deals on international commercial arbitration
Note: UNCITRAL "Model Law" refers to ADR System called "international commercial
arbitration" - which is adopted by many countries including the Philippines in order to
harmonize different/conflicting arbitration laws of different countries regarding
commercial dispute international in nature - thereby in harmonizing those conflicting
laws, there will be a unified laws and rules (which we call it "Model Law") to be observed
by different countries as regards the arbitration of commercial dispute international in
nature
(4) Confidential information (Section 3 [h] ADRA)
Any information relevant to the subject of mediation/arbitration - which information was
obtained from a source who intends or who has reasonable expectation that such
information will not to be disclosed (further asides from mediation/arbitration). Confidential
information obtained from a source - includes:
(a) Insofar as mediation and arbitration are concerned:
Any communication or information (oral/written) obtained through
mediation/arbitration - including memoranda, notes, or work products of non-party
participant who participated in the mediation/arbitration (e.g., witness)
 (1) Non-party participant (Section 3 [z] ADRA)
Refers to persons who participated in the mediation/arbitration not as party nor
mediator/arbitrator (e.g., witness whether as source of information, resource person
such as expert witness)
(b) Insofar as mediation is concerned:
Any communication or information (oral/written) obtained through mediation,
INCLUDING statements made by any of the mediation parties for purposes of considering,
initiating or conducting mediation, for purposes of participating in the mediation, or for
purposes of continuing or reconvening mediation (i.e., to resume mediation), or for
purposes of retaining a mediator
(c) Insofar as arbitration is concerned:
Any communication or information (oral/written) such as pleadings, motions,
manifestations, witness statements, reports by any person (expert or not on the subject
of arbitration) to the arbitrator during arbitration
(5) Court (Section 3 [k] ADRA)
Refers to RTC (Note: "Court" also referred to under Article 6 of Model Law refers to RTC; So
remember whenever you see "court" under the ADRA, you refer to it as RTC)
(a) Court-annexed Mediation (CAM; Section 3 [l] ADRA)
Refers to a judicial compulsory mediation (known as JDR) particularly during the pre-trial
stage of the action ordered by the court (a quo), or during appeal ordered by the
appellate court - after such court acquired jurisdiction over the action
(b) Court-referred Mediation (Section 3 [m] ADRA)
Refers to an order of the court regarding a case filed with it to first undergo mediation
(not with the court's PMC but rather under ADRA) when one of the parties prematurely
filed action in court despite prior agreement of the parties (known as mediation
agreement) to first settle their dispute through mediation
(6) Convention award (Section 3 [i] ADRA in relation to [j])
Refers to foreign arbitral award rendered by Convention State (i.e., Convention State is a
country that is a member of the 1958 New York Convention [e.g., the Philippines])
(a) 1958 New York Convention (Section 3 [w] ADRA)
Refers to UN Convention on the matter of Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign
Arbitral Award rendered/decided by one country and to be recognized and enforced by
a host country (i.e., hot host country is where the foreign arbitral award is to be recognized
and enforced/executed; Note: Philippine is a signatory to the 1958 New York Convention)
Example: The arbitral award is rendered by US (foreign country) but the property subject
of the arbitration is located in the Philippines. Here, the remedy of the winning party
 when the losing party refuses to abide by the award is to file Petition with RTC in the
Philippines (as a host country) for the recognition and enforcement of the foreign arbitral
award
(7) Non-convention Award (Section 3 [x] ADRA)
Refers to foreign arbitral award rendered by Non-convention State (i.e., Non-convention
State is a country that is not a member of the 1958 New York Convention [Section 3 [y] ADRA])
(8) Proceeding (Section 3 [aa])
Refers to court or quasi-judicial proceeding
Note: So remember whenever you see "proceeding" under the ADRA, you refer to it as court
or quasi-judicial proceeding
(9) Record (Section 3 [bb])
Refers to information written on tangible medium (e.g., paper), or in a retrievable electronic
or other similar medium (e.g., data encoded on computer disc, hard disc, website, etc.; viz.,
retrievable soft copy)
CHAPTER 3. - MEDIATION

 MEDIATION (Section 3 [q] ADRA in relation to Article 1.6 B [6] DOJ IRR)
A form of ADR system where disputants voluntarily agree to settle their dispute through
mediation (i.e., such agreement called "mediation agreement") to be presided by the mediator
chosen by the parties – to be conducted according to the rules agreed upon by the parties, or in
absence/default of such agreement in accordance with the ADRA and DOJ IRR. The role of the
mediator is not to make decision but rather to assist/help the parties (by convincing them) to
enter into amicable settlement (Note: Mediation is a process that is non-merit based where the
mediator will not delve on the factual and legal issues of the dispute - unlike arbitration, med-
arb, early neutral evaluation and mini-trial)

 SCOPE OF MEDIATION UNDER ADRA (Section 7 ADRA)

By the voluntary agreement of the parties, mediation includes all disputes except those that
cannot be subjected under ADRA as provided under Section 6 ADRA (whether by mediation,
conciliation, arbitration, early neutral evaluation, mini-trial or any combination). Mediation
under ADRA does not include Court-annexed Mediation (CAM) because it is judiciary's own
dispute resolution called JDR (in contrast mediation under ADRA is an out of court/quasi-judicial),
and CAM is also a compulsory mediation where the court orders the parties to undergo
mediation during pre-trial stage of the court a quo or during appeal (likewise excluded from
ADRA is the mandatory mediation by Lupon Tagapamayapa under the LGC; in contrast with
mediation under ADRA which is voluntary upon the parties). Such mediation under ADRA can
either be ad hoc or institutional.
Note: Section 6 ADRA: The following are not within the scope of ADRA: [a] labor disputes, [b] civil
status of persons, [c] validity of a marriage (void or voidable), [d] legal separation, [e] jurisdiction
of courts, [f] future legitime, [g] criminal liability, and [h] those disputes cannot be compromised
under the Philippines law
(1) Ad Hoc Mediation
Refers to mediation whose existence is co-terminus with the termination of the mediation
whether successful or not. The mediation rules to be observed depends upon the agreement
of the parties
Note: "Ad hoc" means for particular purpose only, and when that purpose is through or no
longer exists, so also the ad hoc mediation. This ad hoc mediation is exemplified by mediation
presided by a natural person
(2) Institutional Mediation
 Refers to mediation that being presided by an institution, its existence continues even after
the termination of the mediation whether successful or not - AND: It continues to exist for
other future mediation between other disputing parties (e.g., the accredited Philippine
Dispute Resolution Center, Inc. [PDRCI]).
If the mediation parties voluntarily agree to settle their dispute by the institutional mediation,
then such agreement ipso jure includes that they shall observe the policies, rules and
procedures of such Institutional Mediation - however, in case of conflict as to rules and
procedures between Institutional Mediation and the ADRA provision, the latter shall prevail
(Section 16 ADRA)

 CONFIDENTIAL AND PRIVILEGE NATURE OF MEDIATION UNDER ADRA

(1) (*) "Confidentiality/Privileged" in mediation - explained
When disputing parties personally confront each other regarding their dispute, of course one
party gives statements in support of his case and contrary to the case of the adverse party,
and so also the adverse party. When the confrontation is not successful for the amicable
settlement of their dispute, the respective statements of the disputing parties during the
confrontation can be given in evidence in the event an action is filed in court/quasi-judicial
by either of the parties. Now, this is what the mediation under ADRA seeks to avoid by
making mediation process and all information given through mediation as "privileged" and
confidential," "privileged" meaning that the mediation process including information,
documents and statements obtained through mediation cannot be given in evidence in
court/quasi-judicial after an unsuccessful mediation - AND: Also "confidential" such that
cannot be made known to others through publication or otherwise. And so by the privilege
and confidentiality of mediation, the disputing parties are encouraged to be candor and
honest about the true facts and circumstances of the status of their respective case, thereby
a party who believes his case is weak is encouraged to admit his accountability/obligation and
encourage the other party to enter into an amicable settlement (knowing that he has a losing
case when brought to court/quasi-judicial) - which admission made during mediation is
anyway protected by ADRA as being privileged and confidential
Note: Confidential information, its definition - read Section 3 [h] ADRA
(2) (*) "Confidentiality" and ""Privileged nature of Information in Mediation (Section 9 ADRA)
Information obtained through mediation are subject to the following principles:
(a) Information obtained through mediation are privileged and confidential
(b) (Being confidential) The mediation parties, mediator and non-party participant (e.g.,
witness) may refuse to further disclose information that they disclosed through and
during mediation, and they can also prevent others from further disclosing such
 information (Note: But an eavesdropper during mediation who has no connection with
the mediation [whether as party, representative, non-party participant, mediator or
witness] may not be prohibited from disclosing such information - however, he can be
made liable for damages to the mediation party that is prejudiced by such disclosure of
the eavesdropper [Section 10 3rd Paragraph] ADRA)
(c) (Being confidential) Information obtained through mediation cannot be subjected to
discovery (under Rules 23-29 of the Civil Procedure), and (being privileged) shall also be
inadmissible in evidence in court/quasi-judicial. However, evidence or information that
is otherwise admissible in evidence (in court/quasi-judicial) does not become
inadmissible or protected from discovery solely by reason of its USE during the mediation
(e.g., during mediation, the lender used/introduced a document entitled "Loan
Agreement" previously executed by the borrower, now, if the mediation is unsuccessful
and the lender subsequently filed action in court for collection of sum of money, he can
use such "Loan Agreement" as his evidence against the borrower)
(d) When the mediation is unsuccessful, and an action is subsequently filed in court/quasi-
judicial, the following persons that were involved in the mediation cannot be compelled
by the court/quasi-judicial to disclose or testify on information obtained through
mediation: (because such information is confidential and privileged)
(1) Mediation parties
(2) Mediator/s
(3) Counsel/representative of parties
(4) Non-party participants (see Section 3 [z]; e.g., witness)
(5) Any person hired in connection with the mediation as secretary, stenographer, clerk
or assistant (whether or not personally and actually present during mediation
proceeding room)
(6) Other person who obtained or possessed information obtained through mediation by
reason of his profession (e.g., records custodian of the ad hoc/institutional mediation
despite not actually present during mediation)
(e) Information obtained through mediation remains privileged and confidential - even if the
mediator found to be impartial during the mediation
(f) Mediator cannot be subpoenaed (ad testficandum/ad duces tecum) by court/quasi-
judicial in order to testify regarding information through mediation. And if he is
wrongfully subpoenaed (due to request of a party) and he appeared in court/quasi-
judicial (and there he explained in court/quasi-judicial that the information is confidential
and privileged and thereby granted), then he has the right to be reimbursed (by the party
who requested the court to subpoena him) the full cost of his attorney's fees (if he hired
 one) and other expenses relevant to such wrong subpoena (e.g., expenses on
transportation and hotel)
Comments:
(a) Confidential information - its definition
Read Section 3 [h] ADRA
(b) "Privileged" nature of information obtained through/during mediation (Exemplified)
Facts: Lender lend P1M to Borrower, where the Borrower executed a promissory note
that he will pay his debt on January 1, 2016. Borrower failed on his obligation to pay
despite demand from the Lender. Lender and Borrower agreed to settle their dispute
through mediation which we call is "mediation agreement". During mediation, Lender
presented the promissory note executed by Borrower, then Borrower admitted during
mediation that he indeed executed the same and admitted his P1M debt. The mediation
was terminated unsuccessful, and so Lender subsequently filed a civil action in court
against Borrower for collection of sum of money. During the presentation of evidence in
court by Lender, Lender testified that during the mediation, Borrower ADMITTED he
indeed executed the promissory note and also admitted his P1M indebtedness.
Question: Can Borrower object against such testimony of Lender?
Answer: YES. Those statements of admissions by the Borrower are information obtained
through mediation and so therefore confidential and privileged, and hence, inadmissible
in evidence
Question: Suppose Lender presented the promissory note executed by Borrower as
documentary evidence in court - can Borrower object on such evidence as privileged
hence inadmissible in evidence considering that Lender presented the same during
mediation?
Answer: NO. Section 9 [c]: Evidence or information that is otherwise admissible does not
become inadmissible or protected from discovery solely by reason of its USE during the
mediation (and in fact such "Promissory Note" is an information obtained not
through/during mediation but in fact already existing even before the mediation).
Remember that it is the USE of the promissory note by Lender during mediation that is
not confidential and privileged. In fact under Section 3 (d) ADRA defining confidential
information, it provides "Any information obtained through mediation/arbitration -
which information was obtained from a source who intends or who has reasonable
expectation that such information not to be disclosed" - now, of course it would be absurd
for the Lender as source of the information particularly that of the "Promissory Note" to
intend or to expect that the promissory note he used/presented during mediation would
 be privileged or confidential that he can no longer use/present the same promissory note
as his evidence during trial in court
Question: Suppose the lender insists that he is not yet paid but the borrower insists that
he already paid his debt - and then the borrower enticed/persuaded the lender to settle
their dispute through mediation under ADRA, and the lender agreed (we have now the
"mediation agreement"). So mediation was conducted but turned unsuccessful, and the
lender later filed an action in court against the borrower. During the presentation of
evidence by the lender in court, he testified that the borrower went to him and
persuaded him to settle their dispute through mediation. Can the borrower object on
ground that such statement of his is privileged and confidential?
Answer: YES. Remember Section 3 [h] [2]: Confidential/privileged information in
mediation includes statements made by any of the mediation parties for purposes of
considering, initiating or conducting mediation, for purposes of participating in the
mediation, or for purposes of continuing or reconvening mediation (i.e., to resume
mediation), or for purposes of retaining a mediator. In the case at bar, when the Borrower
went to the Lender, his purpose was to consider the possibility of Lender agreeing to
settle their dispute through mediation.
Question: Suppose on January 1, the Borrower went to the Lender admitting his already
due P1M debt but asked for longer period to pay but denied by the Lender. Then on
January 2, the Borrower went back to the Lender and enticed/persuaded the Lender to
settle their dispute through mediation under ADRA, and the Lender agreed (we have now
the "mediation agreement"). So mediation was conducted but turned unsuccessful, and
the Lender later filed an action in court against the Borrower. During the presentation of
evidence by the Lender in court, he testified that on January 1 the Borrower went to him
and admitted his P1M debt. Can the Borrower object on ground that such statement of
his is privileged and confidential?
Answer: NO. Section 3 [h] [2] does not apply in favor of the Borrower. Remember that
when the Borrower went to the Lender on January 1 and there admitted his P1M debt,
the Borrower did not approach the Lender for the purpose of considering mediation

 (*) INSTANCES WHERE INFORMATION OBTAINED THROUGH/DURING MEDIATION - ARE

NOT "PRIVILEGE" AND "CONFIDENTIAL"
(1) Waiver of confidentiality of information obtained through/during mediation (Section 10
ADRA; hence, such information admissible in evidence in court/quasi-judicial)
(a) Waived in a record (e.g., minutes of the mediation proceedings) by all mediation parties
and mediator through manifestation (either oral or in writing) during "mediation
proceeding"
Note: Remember in this particular Section 10 ADRA, the law specifies that the proceeding
is mediation. But if ADRA does not specifically provides that kind of proceedings, you refer
to it as court/quasi-judicial proceedings because Section 3 [aa] refers to "proceedings" as
court/quasi-judicial proceedings.
Note: "Record" (Section 3 [bb] ADRA): Refers to information written on tangible medium
(e.g., paper), or in a retrievable electronic or other similar medium [viz., retrievable soft
copy such as those information contained in USB disk]
(b) Waived by the non-party participant (e.g., witness) provided - (1) such information is
sourced from him (Section 10 Par 2 ADRA) - PROVIDED: With the consent of all mediation
parties (Section 3.22 [b] DOJ IRR)
 Doctrine of Estoppel (Section 10 Par 3 and 4 ADRA)
A person (whether he be party, his representative, non-party participant or mediator) who
disclosed confidential/privileged information is estopped from invoking privilege
information under Section 9 ADRA, and he can be compelled to disclose the rest of the
information necessary for the complete understanding of the confidential information
he disclosed. But if another person is prejudiced by such disclosure and suffered
loss/damages (e.g., mediation party), then he can file action in proper court for damages
against such person who made disclosure of confidential information
HOWEVER: A person who is prejudiced in a court/quasi-judicial proceeding (we call him
prejudiced person) prejudiced by a person (we call him prejudicing person) due to the
disclosure by the latter of confidential/privileged information relevant to mediation, then,
the prejudiced person has the right to further disclose other privileged/confidential
information obtained through mediation only to the extent necessary for him to respond
and defend himself (Note: Such prejudiced person cannot be liable for any damages)
Note: "Person" who made disclosure of confidential information can refer to a mediation
party, mediator, counsel, non-party participant, mediation
secretary/stenographer/clerk/assistant, any person who obtains/possesses confidential
information by reason of his profession (e.g., records custodian of the Ad Hoc mediation or
institutionalized mediation), or any other person whether or not connected with the mediation
(e.g., eavesdropper, or any other person)
Question: In a court proceeding (not involving Lender and Borrower as parties), the Mediator
testified and disclosed that during the mediation he previously presided between Lender and
 Borrower, the latter admitted his debt. Can the court force the Mediator to further disclose
other confidential/privileged information?
Answer: YES. Provided those further disclosure are relevant to the case and will enable the
court to fully understand about the debt of the Borrower to the Lender - such as what amount
is the debt, when the debt incurred, when it is due and other relevant disclosures
Question: Can the Borrower file damages against the Mediator?
Answer: YES. The Borrower being prejudiced by the disclosure made by the Mediator, he can
file an action for damages against the Mediator in the proper court
Question: Supposed after or during the time the Mediator disclosed those
confidential/privileged information in a certain action, there is also pending action between
Lender and the Borrower - now, can the Borrower in a case pending between him and the
Lender make further disclosure of confidential/privileged information?
Answer: YES. But only to the extent necessary for the Borrower to respond to and defend
himself against those disclosures by the Mediator
Sub-question: Will the Borrower liable to the Lender for damages?
Answer: NO. The Borrower is constrained to and has the right to defend himself against
those disclosures made by the Mediator
(2) Exceptions to privileged/confidential information obtained through/during mediation
(Section 11 ADRA; hence, such information admissible in evidence in court/quasi-judicial)
 No privilege information under Section 9 ADRA in the following (Section 11 [a] ADRA):
(1) When all the mediation parties agree contained by a record (e.g., paper, minutes of
the mediation proceedings, or tape recording) and authenticated (confirmed or
signed) by all of them - then that information obtained through mediation is not
privileged
Note: Section 10 Par 1 ADRA: Waiver of mediation confidentiality: WAIVED by all
mediation parties and mediator through oral manifestation during "proceeding"
either in oral or in "record". Now, this waiver under Section 10 Par 1 ADRA speaks
about "waiver" of mediation information, in contrast with Section 11 [a] [1] ADRA
which speaks about "exception" to confidentiality/privileged mediation information
(2) When the information obtained through/during mediation - (a) is available to the
public (e.g., public document such as notarized document since notarized document is
deemed as public document), or (b) is required by law to be open to the public, or (c)
was obtained in a mediation proceeding that is open to the public (i.e., mediation was
allowed by the parties to be conducted open to the public)
Reason: Considering that the information is a public document or that law requires
such information to be open to the public, then it is not confidential. Also considering
 that the information was obtained through/during mediation was allowed by the
parties to be open to the public, then the mediation parties intended that such
information is not confidential
(3) When the information obtained through/during mediation is a statement of threat or
plan to inflict physical injury or crime of violence
Reason: Mediation information confidentiality does not countenance/tolerate crime
Example: During mediation, the Lender threatened to kill the Borrower if the latter will
not pay his debt
(4) When the confidentiality of mediation information was intentionally used (or taken
advantaged of) to plan a crime, attempt to commit a crime, or conceal an ongoing
crime/criminal activity
Reason: Mediation under ADRA does not tolerate a crime to be committed, or to
conceal an ongoing/continuing crime (e.g., rebellion)
(5) When the information obtained through/during mediation refers to prove or disprove
about the abuse, neglect, abandonment, or exploitation against a person protected
by law which the government is protecting (e.g., DSWD protecting children)
HOWEVER: Information obtained through/during mediation is still confidential and
privileged when the court ordered a mediation to be conducted where the subject of
such mediation is about child protection, or a government agency (e.g., DSWD)
participates in a mediation regarding child protection
(6) When sought to be proven/disproved is about the professional
misconduct/malpractice of the mediator during mediation
Reason: Mediator cannot use the confidential and privilege given under mediation to
protect his misconduct/malpractice he committed during mediation
(7) When sought to be proven/disproved is about the professional
misconduct/malpractice of the mediation party, representative/counsel of the
mediation party or non-party participant during mediation
Reason: Such persons cannot use the confidential and privilege nature of mediation to
conceal his misconduct/malpractice he committed during mediation
 No privilege information under Section 9 ADRA (Section 11 [b] ADRA)
When after hearing "in camera" by the court/quasi-judicial, the latter found/believed
that the evidence sought to be proven/disproved in said court/quasi-judicial is not
available but only available in the information obtained through/during mediation - and
there is a need for such evidence to be presented in court/quasi-judicial which
substantially outweighs the policy of confidentiality/privilege of such information - THEN:
 The confidentiality/privilege of such information obtained through/during mediation can
be presented in evidence:
(1) In the court proceeding that involves crime/felony; or
(2) In the court/quasi-judicial proceeding to prove/disproved the contract which under
the law could be reformed (reformation of contract as when the true intention of the
parties is not reflected in a contract due to mistake, fraud, inequitable conduct such
as force/intimidation, or due to accident) or the contract can be avoided
(void/voidable contract)
Note: "Camera" is a Latin word meaning "in chamber". So hearing "in camera” refers to
court/quasi-judicial proceedings held privately and inside the chamber of the
judge/hearing officer excluding the public; it is the opposite of public trial where public
are allowed to observe the hearing. In relation to hearing "in camera" under Section 11
[b] ADRA, the hearing is held privately without the public for purposes of determining
whether or not the mediation information is confidential/privilege
 Privileged of mediator
Mediator cannot be compelled by court/quasi-judicial:
1. To provide information/evidence obtained through/during mediation (duces tecum),
or to testify on information/evidence obtained through/during mediation (ad
testificandum) (Section 11 [c] ADRA)
2. To provide report, assessment, evaluation, recommendation, finding, or other
communication - relevant to mediation (duces tecum or ad testificandum) - BUT: The
mediator can be compelled to provide information (Section 12 ADRA):
(a) That the mediation was conducted, and/or that it was already terminated, and/or
that an amicable settlement was reached by the disputing parties in the
mediation - but only to that extent
(b) Those that are allowed to be disclosed under Section 13 ADRA (i.e., to disclose
facts likely to affect the impartiality of mediator, his financial or personal
interest in the outcome/result of the mediation, his present/past relationship with
any of the mediation parties/participants and his relation with those persons that
are foreseeable to be party/participant in the mediation)
 "Limited evidentiary purpose" for the use of the confidential/privileged
information/evidence/communication excepted under Section 11 [a] and [b] ADRA - in
the court/quasi-judicial (Section 11 [d] ADRA)
What can be presented in court/quasi-judicial is that only those portions of the
confidential or privileged information/evidence obtained through/during mediation -
only for the purpose necessary to prove/disproved those that are mentioned under
 Section 11 [a] and [b] ADRA (viz., such information that are not necessary to
prove/disprove those that are mentioned under Section 11 [a] and [b] ADRA remains
privileged/confidential)

 ENFORCEMENT OF THE SETTLEMENT AFTER SUCCESSFUL MEDIATION (Section 17 ADRA)

When mediation is successful, the mediation parties shall sign a document called "Mediated
Settlement Agreement", or "Settlement Agreement", or "Compromise Agreement" - or in any
other nomenclature so long as such document embodies the settlement of the dispute
In the execution of the mediated settlement agreement, there is no problem if the mediation
parties faithfully comply and execute the settlement agreement. But the problem arises when
one of the mediation parties does not abide by the settlement agreement, or that he questions
the settlement agreement. Hence, the remedy of the other party is to Deposit and then file
Petition to Enforce the mediation settlement agreement with the RTC to compel the non-
performing party to comply - and the rules to be observed once the Petition is filed with RTC is
the Special ADR Rules promulgated by the Supreme Court (i.e., A.M. 07-11-08-SC effective 2009
[particularly Rule 15 of the Special ADR Rules).
(1) In the mediated settlement agreement after successful mediation, can the mediation
parties agree that the said mediated settlement agreement shall be treated as "arbitral
award" instead as "mediated settlement agreement"?
YES. In that case, when the other mediation party does not abide to execute the mediated
settlement agreement converted to arbitral award, the remedy of the other mediation party
is to file Petition to enforce the arbitral award with RTC (not Petition to Enforce Mediation
Settlement Agreement)
CHAPTER 4. - ARBITRATION in GENERAL

 ARBITRATION (Section 3 [d])

(*) Also a form of ADR system where the disputants voluntarily agree to settle their dispute
through arbitration (i.e., such agreement called "arbitration agreement" or "submission
agreement, as the case maybe") to be presided by an arbitrator chosen by the parties (or
chosen in accordance with the Rules agreed upon the parties, or in the absence thereof, in
accordance with the Rules mandated under ADRA/DOJ IRR) whose role (i.e., arbitrator) is to
make a decision based on the merit called "arbitral award" binding upon the parties (Note:
Arbitration is the only ADR system under ADRA that a binding decision is rendered)

 MAIN DISTINCTION BETWEEN MEDIATION AND ARBITRATION

(1) Nature of proceeding
In arbitration proceeding: It is merit-based proceeding because the arbitrator will delve
upon the factual issues according to the evidence presented by the parties and thereafter
the arbitrator will delve upon legal issues based on the evidence presented - and
thereafter, the arbitrator will render a binding decision embodying arbitral award
In mediation proceeding: It is not merit-based proceeding because the mediator will not
delve upon factual and legal issues nor require the parties to present evidence, and being
non-merit based, the mediator will not render decision rather the mediator will merely
assist the parties voluntarily amicably settle their dispute who are free on how to settle
their own dispute but they are not obliged to settle
(2) Who presides on the dispute
In arbitration: It is the arbitrator
In mediation: It is the mediator

 KINDS OF ARBITRATION
(1) Voluntary arbitration (whether domestic arbitration, construction industry arbitration, or
international commercial arbitration; Note: All kinds of ADR systems under ADRA including
arbitration - are voluntary)
It is voluntary because the parties are free whether or not they want to settle their dispute
through arbitration (which we call it arbitration agreement). But once they enter into
arbitration agreement, then, being a contract itself, they are bound to undergo arbitration -
which after arbitration hearing, the arbitrator shall render a binding decision we call it
arbitral award
 Kinds of voluntary arbitration under ADRA
(a) Domestic Arbitration (under Chapter 5 ADRA in relation to RA 876)
This arbitration covers any domestic controversy existing between parties, including
dispute on contracts (i.e., controversies that arise between parties within the
Philippines [EXCEPT: Dispute International in nature, or construction industry dispute,
or labor dispute)
(b) Construction Industry Arbitration (under Chapter 6 in relation to EO 1008)
Arbitration on dispute on contract regarding construction in the Philippines
(c) International Commercial Arbitration (Chapter 4 ADRA)
To make it an "International Commercial" arbitration, such arbitration must be both
"international" and "commercial"
 When can the arbitration "international" (Article 1.6 [C] [8] DOJ IRR)
Arbitration is "international" if any of the following exist:
(1) When at the time the arbitration parties agreed to have their dispute undergo
arbitration (i.e., arbitration agreement), their places of business are in
different countries; or
(2) One of the following places is located outside the Philippines where the
parties have their places of business:
(a) The venue of the arbitration (which is outside the Philippines) which is
agreed by the parties in their arbitration agreement; or
(b) The substantial portion of the obligations as determined in the
commercial contract between the parties - is to be performed (which is
outside the Philippines); or
(c) The place where the subject matter of the dispute is most closely
connected (which is outside the Philippines); or
(d) The parties expressly agreed that the subject matter of the arbitration
agreement relates to more than one country (which is outside the
Philippines)
Note: When the International Commercial Arbitration is conducted in the
Philippines, then it is both "domestic and international" in character. But if such
arbitration is conducted outside the Philippines, then it is a "foreign" arbitration
 When can the arbitration is "commercial" (Section 3 [g] ADRA in relation to
Section 21 ADRA and Section 1.6 C[4] DOJ IRR)
Arbitration is "commercial" if the subject matter refers to dispute arising from
relationship commercial in nature whether contractual or non-contractual (i.e.,
non-contractual such as violation of intellectual property law [e.g., unlawful use of
trademark]; cutthroat competition, etc.). This dispute that is commercial in nature
are the following but not limited to:
1. Any trade transaction for the supply of goods/services (i.e., sales), or exchange
of goods/services (i.e., barter)
2. Distribution agreements (Note: It refers to agreement between supplier and
distributor of goods)
3. Construction works (Note: This is under the jurisdiction of Construction
Industry Arbitration Commission [CIAC] provided the construction is conducted
in the Philippines)
4. Commercial representation/agency (Note: Agent seeks customers on behalf of
his principal for commercial/business purposes)
5. Factoring (Note: It refers to a financial transaction where a business sells its
accounts receivables [e.g., invoices, promissory notes, checks, etc. given by
debtors] to a person [factor] at a discounted price – and that the factor (as
subrogee) will be the one now to collect from the debtors at full amount of his
debt plus damages. Factoring becomes necessary when a business no longer
has sufficient revolving cash to meet business activities)
6. Leasing
7. Consulting (Note: It refers to a person [consultant] giving expert advice to a
person/company in connection with business)
8. Engineering
9. Licensing (Note: It refers to licensing agreement where licensor gives the
licensee the right to produce and sell goods applying the brand
name/trademark of the licensor [also called “franchising”]; Jollibee franchise)
10. Investment (Note: It refers to act of investing or committing/entrusting
money/property to another for a future income; e.g., buying stocks in the stock
market; Multi-level Marketing [MLM])
11. Financing (Note: It refers to providing capital [money] to a person for the
latter’s business or personal use, investment, etc.; e.g., BPI to the loan
borrower)
12. Banking (Note: It refers to business conducted by a bank accepting deposits
from its depositors in exchange for interests, and then the bank lending the
deposit to another or investing it for profit)
13. Insurance
 14. Joint venture and other forms of industrial or business cooperation (Note: It
refers to agreement where 2/more parties pooling/combining their resources
for business purposes)
15. Carriage of goods and/or passengers by air, water or land
(2) Compulsory arbitration
It is compulsory such that once dispute arises, the parties must settle their dispute through
arbitration - even without prior arbitration agreement
 Example of compulsory arbitration
Labor dispute under the Labor Code
Note: Remember that ALL modes of settling dispute under ADRA are "voluntary"

 ARBITRATION AGREEMENT (ITS NATURE)

Arbitration agreement is a written agreement subscribed by the parties (or their representative)
agreeing that their dispute will undergo arbitration (whether domestic arbitration, construction
industry arbitration, or international commercial arbitration) (Ormoc Sugarcane Planters'
Association, Inc. Vs. Court of Appeals, GR 156660, August 24, 2009; Note: Insofar as arbitration
before CIAC is concerned, the arbitration agreement must be in writing, but needed not be signed
by the parties so long as intent to submit to arbitration is clear [e.g., phone text messages]; see
Section 4.1.3 CIAC Rules)
Where can we find the arbitration agreement: Arbitration agreement can be in the form of
clause which is imbedded in the main contract of the parties (in this case, the main contract is
called "container contract" and the imbedded arbitration agreement is called "arbitration
clause"), or it could be in the form of another contract separated from but in reference to the
main contract (this is called "submission agreement") - but whether arbitration clause or
submission agreement, they are both basically arbitration agreement. Main contract contains the
terms and conditions of the contractual relation of the parties (e.g., their transaction), while the
arbitration agreement is another contract stating therein that in case dispute arises between the
parties then such dispute will undergo arbitration
As to time the arbitration agreement exists: The arbitration agreement can exist at the time the
main contract was executed (which we call it arbitration agreement whether imbedded in the
same main contract or in another contract). Arbitration agreement can also exist at a later date
after the execution of the main contract (which we call it submission agreement) when the parties
later agreed that in case of dispute, it will undergo arbitration
As to the interpretation of arbitration agreement: Arbitration agreement between parties must
be liberally construed - such that in case of doubt, it must be construed in favor of arbitration
(LM Power Engineering Corporation vs. Capitol Industrial Construction Groups, Inc., GR 141833,
March 26, 2003).

 (*) SEPARABILITY/SEVERABILITY DOCTRINE, APPLIES TO ARBITRATION AGREEMENT

(Gonzales vs. Climax Mining Ltd., GR 167994 [ 2007])
While the general rule is that the invalidity of main contract carries with it the invalidity of the
ancillary contract on ground that the latter is dependent on the former. This is not true in
arbitration agreement (whether arbitration clause or submission agreement). As ruled in the case
of Gonzales vs. Climax Mining Ltd. (supra), arbitration agreement is
separable/severable from the main contract such that the invalidity of the main
contract does not carry with it the invalidity of the arbitration agreement. This ruling
in Gonzales vs. Climax Mining Ltd (supra) is reiterated in the case of Cargil Philippines, Inc. Vs.
San Fernando Trading, Inc., GR 175404, January 31, 1011, where the Supreme Court ruled, An
arbitration agreement which though forms part of the main contract shall not be
regarded as invalid or non-existent just because the main contract is invalid or did
not exist (i.e., void main contract), since the arbitration agreement is treated as
separate agreement/contract independent from the main/container contract
In fact under Article 4.16 (a) DOJ IRR: The arbitration agreement (whether arbitration
clause or submission agreement - both are deemed arbitration agreement) though forms
part or related to the main contract, shall be treated as independent from the main
contract - such that the nullity of the main contract does not carry with the nullity of the
arbitration agreement
Question: Suppose there is arbitration agreement but the main/container contract is void, or the
parties did not really enter into main/container contract - the question is, should the parties still
undergo arbitration in case of dispute?
Answer: YES. As ruled by the Supreme Court, the arbitration agreement is distinct and
independent from the main contract - under the Doctrine of Separability/Severability of
arbitration agreement
Question: Pursuant to the Doctrine of Separability, the arbitration agreement obliges the parties
to undergo arbitration. Now, the question is, supposed during the arbitration proceeding, it is
proven that the main contract is inexistent/invalid/unenforceable, should the arbitrator render
arbitral award?
Answer: NO. The arbitrator should dismiss the arbitration - considering that the main contract is
void/voidable/unenforceable, then what is there for the arbitrator to render arbitral award?
Note: Arbitral tribunal has the power to rule on the validity of the main/container contract as
void/voidable/unenforceable (This is by implication of Article 4.16 DOJ IRR). In fact the Supreme
Court ruled: “The arbitration agreement clearly expressed the parties' intention that any dispute
between them as buyer and seller should be referred to arbitration. It is for the arbitrator and
not the courts to decide whether a contract between the parties exists or is valid” (Cargill Phils.
Inc. San Fernando Regala Trading, Inc., GR 175404, January 31, 2011)

 (*) FINDINGS of FACTS of the ARBITRATOR in the ARBITRATION (Uniwide Sales Realty vs.
Titan-Ikeda Construction, GR 126619, December 20, 2006)
Court will not review the factual findings of an arbitral tribunal upon the artful allegation that
the arbitral tribunal "misapprehended facts" no matter how cleverly disguised they might be as
"legal questions" - UNLESS: Where a clear showing that the arbitral tribunal in reaching its factual
conclusions, the arbitral tribunal committed an error so egregious (so obvious/flagrant) and
hurtful/prejudicial to one party as to constitute a grave abuse of discretion resulting in lack or
loss of jurisdiction. Typical examples would be factual conclusions of the arbitral tribunal which
resulted in deprivation of one or the other party of a fair opportunity to present his case before
the arbitral tribunal, and an arbitral award obtained through fraud or through the corruption
of arbitrator
CHAPTER 5. - INTERNATIONAL COMMERCIAL ARBITRATION (ICA;
UNDER ADRA AND ITS DOJ IRR)

 TWO FACETS of "INTERNATIONAL" "COMMERCIAL" ARBITRATION

Remember that to make it "International Commercial" Arbitration, it must not only be
commercial but also be international.
(1) When is it that the arbitration is "International" (Section 19 ADRA in relation to Article 1[3]
Model Law)
Arbitration is "international" if any of the following exist: (DOJ IRR)
(a) When at the time the arbitration parties agreed to have their dispute undergo arbitration
(i.e., arbitration agreement), their places of business are in different countries; or
(b) One of the following places is located outside the Philippines where the parties have
their places of business:
1. The venue of the arbitration (which is outside the Philippines) which is agreed by the
parties in their arbitration agreement; or
2. The substantial portion of the obligations as determined in the commercial contract
between the parties - is to be performed (which is outside the Philippines); or
3. The place where the subject matter of the dispute is most closely connected (which
is outside the Philippines); or
4. The parties expressly agreed that the subject matter of the arbitration agreement
relates to more than one country (which is outside the Philippines)
(2) When is it that the arbitration is "Commercial" (Section 3 [g] ADRA in relation to 21 ADRA)
Arbitration is "commercial" if the subject matter refers to dispute arising from relationship
commercial in nature whether contractual or non-contractual (i.e., non-contractual such as
violation of intellectual property law [e.g., unlawful use of trademark]; cutthroat competition,
etc.). This dispute that is commercial in nature are the following but not limited to:
a. Any trade transaction for the supply of goods/services (i.e., sales), or exchange of
goods/services (i.e., barter)
b. Distribution agreements (Note: It refers to agreement between supplier and distributor of
goods)
c. Construction works (Note: This is under the jurisdiction of Construction Industry
Arbitration Commission [CIAC] provided the construction is conducted in the Philippines)
d. Commercial representation/agency (Note: Agent seeks customers on behalf of his
principal for commercial/business purposes)
 e. Factoring (Note: It refers to a financial transaction where a business sells its accounts
receivables [e.g., invoices, promissory notes, checks, etc. given by debtors] to a person
[factor] at a discounted price – and that the factor (as subrogee) will be the one now to
collect from the debtors at full amount of his debt plus damages. Factoring becomes
necessary when a business no longer has sufficient revolving cash to meet business
activities)
f. Leasing
g. Consulting (Note: It refers to a person [consultant] giving expert advice to a
person/company in connection with business)
h. Engineering
i. Licensing (Note: It refers to licensing agreement where licensor gives the licensee the right
to produce and sell goods applying the brand name/trademark of the licensor [also called
“franchising”]; Jollibee franchise)
j. Investment (Note: It refers to act of investing or committing/entrusting money/property
to another for a future income; e.g., buying stocks in the stock market; Multi-level
Marketing [MLM])
k. Financing (Note: It refers to providing capital [money] to a person for the latter’s business
or personal use, investment, etc.; e.g., BPI to the loan borrower)
l. Banking (Note: It refers to business conducted by a bank accepting deposits from its
depositors in exchange for interests, and then the bank lending the deposit to another or
investing it for profit)
m. Insurance
n. Joint venture and other forms of industrial or business cooperation (Note: It refers to
agreement where 2/more parties pooling/combining their resources for business
purposes)
o. Carriage of goods and/or passengers by air, water or land

 WHAT GOVERNS the ICA (Section 19 ADRA in relation to 4.2 DOJ IRR)
Shall be governed by the Model Law
1. What is Model Law (Section 3 [v] ADRA)
(*) "Model Law" is issued by UNCITRAL (United Nations Commission on International Trade
Law - where several countries have adopted including the Philippines) which deals on
international commercial arbitration
Note: UNCITRAL "Model Law" refers to ADR System called "international commercial
arbitration" - which is adopted by many countries including the Philippines in order to
harmonize different/conflicting laws on international commercial arbitration of different
 countries - thereby being harmonized, there will be a unified rules on commercial arbitration
that is international in nature to be observed by different countries

 (*) INTERPRETATION on MODEL LAW in relation to ICA (Section 20 ADRA in relation to Article
4.2 DOJ IRR)
When you interpret the provisions of Model Law in relation to ICA, due regard must be given as
to its international origin (i.e., the UNCITRAL that issued the law) for the purpose of uniformity
in the interpretation on the Model Law by different countries (who are signatories on the New
York Convention) - so that in case of issue in the interpretation of Model Law, resort can be made
on the travaux preparatoire and the report of the UNCITRAL Secretary General (which report
entitled "International Commercial Arbitration: Analytical Commentary on draft Trade" with
reference number A/CN 9/264)
(1) In interpreting Model Law, due regard be given to its international origin
Model Law is "international in origin" because it is issued by UNCITRAL where there are many
countries who are signatories to the New York Convention pertaining to Model Law (hence,
that what makes the Model Law as "international in origin") - and being international in
origin, there would be uniformity in the interpretation on the provisions of Model Law by
those signatory countries as regards the "International Commercial Arbitration"
(2) Travaux Prepapatoire - as an aid in interpreting the Model Law
This refers to the UNCITRAL documents, minutes of discussions and debates that were
officially recorded during the drafting/making of the Model Law (just like the minutes of the
debates and discussions made in the Congress regarding a bill before it is passed by the
Congress to the President for his signature in order to become a law)
(3) Report of the UNCITRAL Secretary General (which report entitled "International Commercial
Arbitration: Analytical Commentary on draft Trade" with reference number A/CN 9/264) - as
aid in interpreting the Model Law
Report, notes and comments of the UNCITRAL Secretary General relevant to international
trade law (or international commercial arbitration) though not binding upon countries that
adopted Model Law, nevertheless, can give guidance/persuasion in interpreting Model Law
(akin to DOJ Secretary/famous criminalists like Justice Regaldao and Justice Reyes where they
can be taken as amicus curiae by the Supreme Court in helping the latter interpreting criminal
laws)

 (*) CONFIDENTIALITY in ICA (Section 23 ADRA; Article 4.41 DOJ IRR)

The following are confidential: (1) ICA proceedings, (2) ICA records, (3) evidence obtained
through ICA, and (4) ICA award - UNLESS: (i.e., not confidential)
(1) With the consent of the ICA parties; or
(2) When a petition is filed with RTC allowed under ADRA (e.g., Petition to Recognize and Enforce
or Set-aside ICA Award) - but limited only to those documents/information relevant to
issue/s in such Petition
HOWEVER: When there is the Petition is pending in RTC, the RTC may issue a "Protective Order"
to prevent disclosure of confidential documents/information containing secret processes, secret
developments, secret research and other secret information - when the disclosure thereof
would materially prejudice the applicant/movant
Note: An example that can be given protective order: “Secret process” regarding the formula of
certain commercial product, "secret research/development" regarding laboratory study on
certain drug to be sold commercially, or "secret information" regarding marketing/commercial
strategy, etc. - which mentioned secrets are critical to the business success that needed to kept
confidential from business competitors

 POWERS/JURISDICTIONS of ICA ARBITRAL TRIBUNAL (Article 4.16 DOJ IRR)

(a) The power of the ICA arbitral tribunal to rule on questions of its jurisdiction (Article 4.16 [a]
DOJ IRR)
The ICA arbitral tribunal has the power to rule when its jurisdiction is questioned by any of
the parties, including the power to rule on questions regarding the
existence/validity/enforceability of the arbitration agreement, including also the power to
rule on questions regarding conditions precedent to the filing of arbitration (i.e., condition/s
that must be fulfilled before going to arbitration)
This arbitration agreement can be included and form part of the main contract (in which case,
the former is called "arbitration clause" and the latter as "container contract"; or the
arbitration agreement can in another document but related to the main contract which is
called "submission agreement") - which arbitration agreement is independent (separate and
distinct from) container contract. Any decision of the arbitral tribunal that the container
contract is null and void does not ipso jure carry with it the invalidity of the arbitration
agreement (this is called "Doctrine of Separability [Gonzales vs. Climax Mining Ltd., GR
167994]; Note: In other words, the arbitration will proceed, but if during the arbitration, it is
proven that the arbitration agreement is inexistent/invalid/unenforceable then the arbitral
tribunal shall dismiss the arbitration. Same principle applies even if the arbitration agreement
is separated from but has reference to the main contract)
(b) Reglementary period within which to question the jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal
(Article 4.16 [b] DOJ IRR)
 For "lack" of jurisdiction: Before the challenging-party submits the statement of his defense
(i.e., before he files his Answer by filing Motion to Dismiss). At any rate, the challenging-party
is not precluded from questioning such lack of jurisdiction even if he already appointed his or
participated in the appointment of arbitrator
Example: The arbitration agreement is inexistent/invalid/unenforceable
For "excess" of jurisdiction: As soon as it becomes apparent during the arbitration
proceeding
Example: The arbitral tribunal is recognizing a dispute not included as dispute in the
arbitration agreement
Delay in questioning "lack" or "excess" of jurisdiction: The arbitral tribunal can nevertheless
entertain the challenge by any party against its jurisdiction - PROVIDED: Such delay of
challenging such jurisdiction is justified
(c) (*) How does the arbitral tribunal rule when its jurisdiction is questioned (Article 4.16 [c]
DOJ IRR)
The ruling of the arbitral tribunal regarding the challenge against its jurisdiction can either
be: (1) rendered as preliminary question [i.e., before the arbitral tribunal begins with the
arbitration proceeding proper] or (2) rendered within the arbitral award [i.e., the arbitral
tribunal deferred/suspended ruling on the challenge against its jurisdiction and instead
continue with the arbitration and the ruling against its jurisdiction to be later included in the
arbitral award - especially when the jurisdiction challenge is doubtful; Note: Unlike in court
proceedings, when its jurisdiction is challenged, the court must first rule thereon before
proceeding hearing the merit of the case]
If the arbitral tribunal ruled that it has jurisdiction that is rendered in a preliminary question,
then the challenging-party can file Petition with RTC (questioning the jurisdiction of the
arbitral tribunal) within 30 days reckoned from his receipt of the Notice of the ruling of the
arbitral tribunal - which decision of the RTC shall be immediately executory not subject to
MR or appeal. NOW: Even pending such Petition with RTC, the arbitral tribunal can
nevertheless continue with the arbitration proceedings and can even render arbitral award
(Note: Pending the Petition with RTC questioning the jurisdiction of arbitral tribunal, the latter
cannot issue TRO/injunction against the arbitral tribunal [Rule 3.18 {B} Special ADR Rules])
Note: When the arbitral tribunal continued with the arbitration proceedings and ultimately
rendered decision via arbitral award, such decision of the arbitral tribunal can be challenged
by filing Petition with RTC to Set Aside/Vacate such arbitral award on ground that the
arbitral tribunal no jurisdiction
 (*) LEGAL REPRESENTATION of PARTIES in ICA (Section 22 ADRA; Article 4.40 DOJ IRR)
A party can be represented by any person of his own choice - PROVIDED: Such representative
cannot appear as counsel in any Philippine court or any quasi-judicial agency, whether or not
such representation in court/quasi-judicial agency is in relation to the ICA arbitration which he
appeared as representative (UNLESS: Such representative is admitted to the Philippine Bar)
Note: Hence, when a representative represented one of the ICA parties in the arbitral tribunal,
and after the arbitral tribunal rendered decision, a Petition is filed with RTC (e.g., Petition for the
Recognition and Enforcement or Setting Aside of an Award in International Commercial
Arbitration), such representative cannot appear as counsel for any of the parties unless he is
admitted to the Philippine bar
CHAPTER 10. - GENERAL PROVISIONS of SPECIAL RULES OF COURT ON
ADR (which for brevity, we shall call it "Special ADR Rules")
 INTRODUCTION
The Special ADR Rules is promulgated by the Supreme Court and took effect September 2009.
These rules apply when the ADR under ADRA is elevated to the court for the latter's intervention
particularly those 12 cases enumerated under Rule 1.1 Special ADR Rules (e.g., Petition for
Interim Measure of Protection, Petition for Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral
Award, Petition for Recognition and Enforcement or Setting Aside of ICA Award, Petition for
Confirmation/Correction/Vacation of Domestic Arbitral Award, etc.). But this court's intervention
is not necessary only when there are no issues before, during and after the ADR between the
parties, or between the any/all of the parties and the person/s officiating the ADR.
In cases court's intervention cannot be avoided, the rules and procedures to govern now is of
course the rules promulgated by the Supreme Court which in particular the Special Rules of Court
on ADR. While we also have the DOJ IRR implementing the ADR, nevertheless such IRR being
issued by the DOJ which is an executive branch of the government, it does not apply to court
which is the judicial branch of the government, pursuant to the separation of powers under the
Constitution. HENCE: In our discussions regarding incidents as regards ADR cases elevated to
court, we will exclusively make the Special ADR Rules issued by the Supreme Court as our
reference. (Note: "Court" refers to RTC - Section 3 [k] ADRA)

 SUBJECT MATTER OF SPECIAL ADR RULES (Rule 1.1 Special ADR Rules)
(1) Petition for: (filed with RTC)
(a) Relief on the issue of Existence, Validity, or Enforceability of the Arbitration Agreement
(Ruler 3 Special ADR Rules);
(b) Interim Measures of Protection (Rule 5 Special ADR Rule);
(c) Appointment of Arbitrator (Rule 6 Special ADR Rules);
(d) Challenge to Appointment of Arbitrator (Rule 7 Special ADR Rules);
(e) Termination of Mandate (function) of Arbitrator (Rule 8 Special ADR Rules);
(f) (RTC) Assistance in Taking Evidence (Rule 9 Special ADR Rules);
(g) Confirmation, Correction or Vacation of Domestic Arbitral Award (Rule 11 Special ADR
Rules);
(h) Recognition and Enforcement or Setting Aside of an ICA Award (Rule 12 Special ADR
Rules);
(i) Recognition and Enforcement of a Foreign Arbitral Award (Rule 13 Special ADR Rules);
(j) Confidentiality/Protective Orders;
 Note: A "Motion" (not Petition) to Suppress Confidential Information can also be filed with
the court where the case is pending (i.e., MTC/RTC/Any proper court [as the case maybe])
to stop a person from disclosing information obtained during ADR proceedings (Rule 10.3
2nd Par Special ADR Rules)
(k) Deposit and Enforcement of Mediated Settlement Agreements (Rule 15 Special ADR
Rules)
(2) Motion for Referral to Alternative Dispute Resolution ("ADR"; particularly arbitration whether
domestic/foreign/ICA/CIAC arbitration[see Rule 4 Special ADR Rules]);
Note: This is filed with court not by way of Petition, but by Motion (Rule 4.3 Special ADR Rules).
The court may be MTC/RTC, depending what court the action is prematurely filed despite
there is a pre-existing arbitration agreement, in which case, the court shall refer the
prematurely filed action/case for arbitration
Note: These Petitions and Motion, to where filed? All herein petitions are filed with RTC, except
for Motion for Referral for arbitration (under Rule 4.3 Special ADR Rules) where the court
(MTC/RTC as the case maybe - depending where the case is pending) refers the case
prematurely filed with it for arbitration - and, also for Motion to Suppress Confidential
Information filed with court (under Rule 10.3 2nd Par Special ADR Rules) wherein the court
(MTC/RTC, as the case maybe - depending where the case is pending) can issue an order
of suppression

 NATURE of COURT PROCEEDINGS under SPECIAL ADR RULES

(1) They are all special proceedings (the reason why Petitions are filed with RTC [not Complaint];
(Rule 1.2 Special ADR Rules).
Note: And being special proceedings, no summon is required to be made by the court to the
respondent in order for the court to acquire jurisdiction over his person – instead, the court
acquires jurisdiction over the Petition/Motion by proof of "two jurisdictional facts" (i.e., [1]
Service of the Petition to the respondent (served by the petitioner in case of petition summary
in nature, or by the court in case of petition non-summary in nature), and the [2] “Notice of
Hearing” to the adverse party [served by the court in case of Petition; served by movant-party
in case of Motion] pursuant to Rule 1.3 [B] Special ADR Rules in relation with Rule 15 ROC)
(2) The proceedings are also summary in nature insofar as: (Rule 1.3 Special ADR Rules)
(a) Petition for:
(i) Relief on the issue of Existence, Validity, or Enforceability of the Arbitration
Agreement;
(ii) Interim Measures of Protection;
(iii) Appointment of Arbitrator;
 (iv) Challenge on the Appointment of Arbitrator;
(v) Termination of Mandate of Arbitrator;
(vi) Assistance in Taking Evidence;
(vii) Confidentiality/Protective Orders; and
Note: A "Motion" to Suppress Confidential Information can also be filed with the
court (MTC/RTC as the case may be) where the case is pending to stop a person
from disclosing information obtained during ADR proceedings (Rule 10.3 2nd Par
Special ADR Rules)
(viii) Deposit and Enforcement of Mediated Settlement Agreements
(b) Motion for Referral to Alternative Dispute Resolution ("ADR" particularly arbitration
whether domestic/foreign/ICA/CIAC [see Rule 4 Special ADR Rules]);
Note: Hence, the following petitions not being included as summary in nature, clearly then
by implication, the following petitions are not summary in nature: (1) Petition for
Confirmation, Correction or Vacation of Domestic Arbitral Award, (2) Petition for Recognition
and Enforcement of a Foreign Arbitral Award, and (3) Petition for Recognition and
Enforcement or Setting Aside of an ICA Award

 RULES to OBSERVE on PETITION/MOTION - that is SUMMARY HEARING in nature

(a) Filing of Petition by Petitioner and his Service thereof to the Respondent (Rule 1.3 [A] Special
ADR Rules)
(For compliance of the first jurisdictional facts) The petitioner before he can file his Petition
with the RTC, shall first serve a copy of his Petition to the respondent either by:
(1) Personal service; or
When the petition is served by personal service, the "Proof of Service" of the Petition shall
be in the form of "Affidavit" executed by the server (i.e., petitioner himself or his
messenger) who personally served the Petition to the respondent stating therein the
time, place and manner of personal service to the respondent
(2) By courier
When the petition is served through courier, the "Proof of Service" of the Petition shall be
in the form of "delivery receipt" (Note: Contents of Proof of Service – read Rule 1.8 [B]
Special ADR Rules)
- AND: After the petitioner served copy of his Petition to the respondent, the petitioner
shall attach to his Petition a "Proof of Service" (to prove to the court that the petitioner
served copy of his Petition to the respondent), then the petitioner can now file his Petition
with the RTC
 NOW: If the service of the Petition is refused by the respondent, or in case of failure to serve
the Petition, the server’s "Affidavit" or the "delivery receipt" (as the case maybe) shall state
the circumstances of the attempt to serve the Petition and the refusal/failure of the service
(Note: When respondent refuses, it is as good as validly served provided such "Affidavit" or
"delivery receipt" states such respondent's refusal)
(b) Notice of Hearing for the Petition/Motion (Rule 1.3 [B] Special ADR Rules)
(After the Petition is filed with RTC) When the RTC finds the Petition sufficient in form and
substance, RTC (through its court server) shall send "Notice of Hearing" of the Petition both
to the petitioner and respondent directing them to appear at certain date and time for the
hearing of the Petition - and in such Notice of Hearing, it directs the respondent to file his
Comment/Opposition to the Petition within the reglementary period of 15 days reckoned
from his receipt of the "Notice of Hearing", and such Notice of Hearing shall also set the date
and time for the hearing on the Petition which shall be within five (5) days reckoned from
the lapse of the reglementary period (i.e., after 15 days reckoned from respondent's receipt
of the Notice of Hearing)
NOW: With regards to Motion to Refer the case to ADR (i.e., court to have the case
prematurely filed with it and refer it for arbitration), or Motion to Suppress Confidential
Information (regarding information obtained through ADR proceedings) filed with court
(MTC/RTC, as the case maybe), the date of hearing for the Motion shall be set by the movant-
party himself stated in his own same Motion (which is commonly practiced written under the
caption Notice of Hearing) - and such Motion in setting the date of Motion hearing, shall
comply with Rule 15 of the Rules of Court (Rule 15 ROC: [Among other provisions of Rule 15
ROC] The date of the Motion hearing shall be stated by the movant-party in his own Motion
which should be set within 10 days reckoned from the time he filed his Motion with the Court,
however the movant-party should ensure that the adverse party must have received a copy
of such Motion at least 3 days before the date of the Motion hearing set by movant in his
Motion)
Note: A Motion which does not observe the 10/3-day rule renders the Motion a worthless
piece of paper - hence, it is not to be given due course by the court (Tan vs. CA, GR 130314,
Sep. 22, 1998)
(c) Summary hearing of the Petition/Motion (Rule 1.3 [C] Special ADR Rules)
(As far as practicable) Being summary in nature, the hearing on the Petition/Motion shall be
limited only for purposes of clarifying facts which shall be conducted for one (1) day hearing
only
(d) When shall the court render its Resolution/Decision on the Petition/Motion that is summary
in nature (Rule 1.3 [D] Special ADR Rules)
 Within 30 days reckoned from the date of the termination of the (summary) hearing of the
Petition/Motion
Note: All Petitions are filed with RTC. However, Motion to Refer the Action for ADR
(particularly to arbitration), or Motion to Suppress Confidential Information, this can be filed
with RTC or MTC (as the case maybe) depending where the action is filed and pending

 SERVICE and FILING of INITIATORY PLEADINGS, and MOTIONS/OTHER PAPERS – regarding

ACTIONS PENDING with COURT - for NON-SUMMARY PETITIONS (Rule 1.8 Special ADR
Rules)
NOTE: The following petitions are not summary in nature: (1) Petition for Confirmation,
Correction or Vacation of Domestic Arbitral Award, (2) Petition for Recognition and Enforcement
of a Foreign Arbitral Award, and (3) Petition for Recognition and Enforcement or Setting Aside of
an ICA Award
Initiatory pleadings (i.e., pleading that is for first time filed in court; e.g., Petition) can be filed
directly to the RTC - and for the court to acquire jurisdiction over the person of the respondent,
it must serve a copy of the Petition to the respondent either by personal service or courier (but
if courier is not available, by registered mail) Note: Unlike in petitions summary in nature where
the petitioner serves a copy of his petition to the respondent before he can file his petition with
the court). HOWEVER: For Petitions already filed and pending in RTC, any motions/other papers
by movant must first served a copy thereof to the adverse party either by personal service or
courier (but if courier is not available, by registered mail) before he can file the same with RTC
(a) "Proof of Filing" of the Initiatory Pleading (i.e., Petition)/Motion/Other Papers - in RTC (Rule
1.8 [A] Special ADR Rules)
Proven by its existence in the record of the case of the RTC. HOWEVER: If it does not exists
on the court record, then it is proven by the written/stamped acknowledgment by the RTC
clerk of court on the copy of the petitioner/movant of his pleading/motion he filed with the
RTC
HOWEVER: If the Petition/Motion is filed with RTC by a courier, then proof of filing is proven
by the delivery receipt of the courier
(b) "Proof of Service" of the Initiatory Pleading (i.e., Petition)/Motion/Other Papers - in RTC
(Rule 1.8 [B] Special ADR Rules)
When service of the Petition/Motion/Other Papers was made through personal service: Then
"Proof of Service"" is proven by:
(1) The admission of the adverse party written on the served Petition/Motion/Other Papers;
or
(2) The official return of server (i.e., the court server); or
 (3) The affidavit of the person serving (i.e., the petitioner, or other person who personally
made the service in behalf of the petitioner)
- STATING: Therein the date, place and manner of personal service
When service of the Petition/Motion/Other Papers was made through courier: Then "Proof
of Service" is proven by affidavit of the person who deposited (e.g., petitioner/movant/court
server) stating therein:
(1) That he deposited the Petition/Motion/Other Papers to the courier company in a sealed
envelope, addressed to the adverse party's office, if not known, to his residence;
(2) That the postage fully pre-paid for the adverse party; and
(3) That with instructions to the courier to immediately provide proof of delivery (i.e.,
delivery receipt)
 Filing and Service of Petition/Motion/Other Papers - through electronic means (e.g., email,
mobile phone messages, etc.; Rule 1.8 [C] Special ADR Rules)
This is allowed by the agreement of the parties and such agreement approved by the RTC -
in which case, "Proof of Filing" and "Proof of Service" are made in accordance with the Rules
on Electronic Evidence

 VERIFICATION - in the PLEADING/MOTION (Rule 1.4 Special ADR Rules)

ALL pleadings (Petition by petitioner, Comment/Opposition to the Petition by respondent, Claim
by petitioner, Defense by respondent) and Motions (to Refer the Action to ADR (particularly
arbitration); to Suppress Confidential Information [filed by either parties to the action pending
before the court [MTC/RTC]) - must be verified, which verification shall state (1) that the
petitioner/respondent/movant has read the pleading/motion, and (2) that the factual allegations
in the pleading/motion are true and correct based on his own personal knowledge or based on
authentic documents which documents are attached to the pleading/motion as annexes (Note:
Verification is merely a formal, not jurisdictional, requirement, affecting merely the form of the
pleading such that non-compliance therewith does not render the pleading fatally defective.
Verification is simply intended to provide an assurance that the allegations are true and correct
and not a product of the imagination or a matter of speculation, and that the pleading is filed in
good faith. [Pagadora vs. Ilao, GR 165769, December 12, 2011])
The pleading/motion may attach therewith the legal brief stating the relevant factual and legal
issues and the applicable law and jurisprudence - which legal brief must be verified by the lawyer
who filed it with the court (Note: Legal brief - is a pleading containing facts, factual and legal
issues, citation of legal authorities [i.e., applicable laws and jurisprudence], and other matters
arose during the proceedings; Rule 1.11 [e] Special ADR Rules)
 CERTIFICATION AGAINST FORUM SHOPPING - in the PLEADING/MOTION (Rule 1.5 Special
ADR Rules)
Initiatory pleadings (i.e., all Petitions, including Motion to Suppress Confidential Information
[except Motion to Refer the case to ADR]) must include "Certification Against Forum Shopping"
stating therein under oath the following: (Note: All initiatory pleadings, i.e., pleading for the first
time filed with court must have Certification Against Forum Shopping)
(a) That the petitioner/movant has not commenced/filed any action/claim involving the same
issues in any court, tribunal or quasi-judicial agency
(b) That to the best of his knowledge, no such action/claim is pending in such court, tribunal or
quasi-judicial agency - AND IF: There be pending, declare the complete statement of the
status thereof; and
(c) That if the petitioner/claimant should later learn that the same/similar action/claim has been
filed/pending, he shall report that fact to the court (where the petition/motion is filed) within
5 days from knowledge thereof
NOW: This "Certification Against Forum Shopping"shall attached to the pleading/motion (to
suppress confidential information), except "Motion to Refer the Action to ADR" (particularly
arbitration; the latter Motion must be verified)
Comments:
(1) By actual practice, the verification and certification against forum shopping joined and
attached/included to the Petition/Motion under same caption "Verification and Certification
Against Forum Shopping"
(2) Effect when Pleading/Motion has no "Certificate Against Forum Shopping"
(In contrast with unverified pleading) Cannot be cured by amendment/supplement, rather
the court has to dismiss the case but generally without prejudice unless the court in its order
of dismissal state therein that it is dismissed with prejudice (Rule 7 Section 5 Par 2 ROC)

 PROHIBITED PLEADINGS/MOTION (Rule 1.6 Special ADR Rules)

The following pleadings/motions are not allowed in cases under the Special ADR Rules
(a) Prohibited pleadings
(1) Petition for Relief from Judgment (under Rule 38 ROC [on ground of FAME; fraud,
accident, mistake and excusable negligence])
(2) Rejoinder to Reply (filed by petitioner after the respondent filed his
Comment/Opposition/Defense)
(3) Other pleading specifically prohibited under Special ADR Rules
(b) Prohibited Motions
 (1) Motion for Extension of Time to File pleading/motion (except when court issued "ex parte"
Temporary Order of Protection [TOP]; see Rule 5.9 Par 5 Special ADR Rules allowing the
respondent to file Motion for Extension of Time to file "Comment/Opposition")
(2) Motion for Bill of Particulars
(3) Motion to declare respondent in default (under Rule 9 Section 3 ROC [for failure to
respondent to file his Comment/Opposition/Defense - within the reglementary period])
(4) Motion to Dismiss (e.g., filed by respondent)
(5) Motion for New Trial (under Rule 37 ROC [for FAME, or newly discovered evidence])
(6) Motion to Re-open Trial (e.g., for miscarriage of justice)
NOW: These prohibited pleadings/motions shall not be accepted by the clerk of court -
HOWEVER: If the clerk of court inadvertently accepted the same, the court can just ignore it and
can even motu proprio expunge the same from the records of the case when found to be dilatory
in nature

 COMPUTATION of TIME (Rule 1.7 Special ADR Rules)

The first day excluded, the last day included. If the last day is Saturday/Sunday/holiday, it shall
be excluded and the working day following shall be included.
If the last day is effectively interrupted (e.g., typhoon), the duration of such interruption shall be
excluded, and the counting shall start again after the cessation of the cause of the interruption

 NO SUMMONS required to be made by the COURT to the adverse party (Rule 1.9 Special
ADR Rules)
When a Petition/Motion (i.e., Motion to suppress confidential information; to refer the case to
ADR [particularly arbitration]) is filed with the court, the court acquires jurisdiction over such
Petition/Motion by "proof of the two jurisdictional facts" (i.e., [1] Service of the Petition to the
respondent (served by the petitioner in case of petition summary in nature, or by the court in case
of petition non-summary in nature), and the [2] “Notice of Hearing” to the adverse party [served
by the court in case of Petition; served by movant-party in case of Motion] pursuant to Rule 1.3
[B] Special ADR Rules in relation with Rule 15 ROC)
(a) Proof of Service (whether by personal service, courier or registered mail; Rule 1.9 [A] Special
ADR Rules)
Read Rule 1.8 [B] Special ADR Rules (supra) regarding "Proof of Service"; and Rule 1.3 [B]
Special ADR Rules (supra) regarding "Notice of Hearing"
Note: Unlike ordinary action under Rules of Court, the court acquires jurisdiction over the
person of the defendant by valid Summon served by the court
(b) Burden of Proof to prove "Proof of Service" and "Notice of Hearing" - were served against
the Adverse Party (Rule 1.9 [B] Special ADR Rules)
Belongs to the petitioner/movant
TOPIC CHAPTER 11. - SPECIFIC COURT RELIEFS under SPECIAL ADR
RULES

 SPECIFIC COURT RELIEFS under ADR (Rule 3 to 13 Special ADR Rules)

(1) Petition regarding the existence, validity and enforceability of the Arbitration Agreement
(filed with RTC; Rule 3 Special ADR Rules)
Note: Arbitration agreement refers to agreement between parties to have their dispute (if any
in the future) settled through arbitration before any court intervention
(2) Motion to Refer the Action for Arbitration (whether the arbitration is
domestic/foreign/ICA/CIAC arbitration] filed with court where action is pending; Rule 4 Special
ADR Rules)
Note: A situation where either of the parties filed an action with regular court despite the pre-
existence of arbitration agreement
(3) Petition for Interim Measure of Protection/Provisional Relief (filed with RTC; Rule 5 Special
ADR Rules)
Note: Petition for interim measure of protection is filed with and ask the RTC for a
protection/relief either - before or after the arbitration is commenced but before the
constitution of the arbitral tribunal, or after the constitution of the arbitral tribunal
(4) Petition for the Appointment of Arbitrator/s (filed with RTC; Rule 6 Special ADR Rules)
Note: This petition can be filed with RTC when the arbitration parties failed/refused to appoint
their arbitrators
(5) Petition to Challenge the Appointment of Arbitrator (filed with RTC; Rule 7 Special ADR Rules)
Note: This petition is filed with RTC when any of the parties challenged the appointment of
one of the arbitrators before the arbitral tribunal and such challenge was denied, and then
after its denial, the challenging-party requested the appointing authority (of the arbitrators)
to rule on the challenge but the appointing authority either failed/refused to act on such
request within the reglementary period
(6) Petition for the Termination of the Mandate of Arbitrator (filed with RTC; Rule 8 Special ADR
Rules)
Note: This petition is filed with RTC when the arbitrator is unable to perform his duty, or
already unduly delayed to perform his duty and he refused to voluntarily vacate his post as
arbitrator despite demand by any of the arbitration parties, and then after such refusal to
vacate the post, the any of the arbitration party requested the appointing authority (of the
arbitrators) to terminate the arbitrator but the appointing authority either failed/refused to
act on such request within the reglementary period
(7) Petition for Assistance in Taking Evidence (filed with RTC pending the arbitration; Rule 9
Special ADR Rules)
Note: Arbitration is a merit-based kind of ADR and with that, it requires presentation and
proving pieces of evidence during the arbitration proceeding (whether testimonial,
documentary or object evidence). When a person is subpoenaed by the arbitrator/arbitral
tribunal whether ad testificandum or ad duces tecum or both, but such person refused to obey
such subpoena, the problem is that the arbitrator/arbitral tribunal (being not a court) has no
coercive power to coerce such person to obey the subpoena. The solution to this problem to
compel said person to obey the subpoena issued by the arbitrator/arbitral tribunal is to file a
Petition with RTC to assist the arbitrator/arbitral tribunal in taking the evidence (because for
the person to refuse the order of the RTC constitutes contempt of court)
(8) Petition to Prevent Disclosure of Confidential Information/Protective Order (filed with RTC;
Rule 10 Special ADR Rules)
Note: This petition is filed with RTC when any of the confidential information that was
obtained during/through arbitration is/are being unduly disclosed - and when such petition is
granted by the RTC, the latter would issue an Order to prevent the disclosure/further
disclosure of such confidential information
(9) Petition to Confirm/Correct/Vacate Domestic Arbitral Award (filed with RTC; Rule 11 Special
ADR Rules)
(10) Petition to Recognize and Enforce, or Set Aside - ICA Award (filed with RTC; Rule 12 Special
ADR Rules)
(11) Petition to Recognize and Enforce Foreign Arbitral Award (filed with RTC; Rule 13 Special
ADR Rules)
(12) Petition for Deposit and Enforcement of Mediated Settlement Agreement
Note: When the mediator in mediation successfully settled their dispute of the mediation
parties, and so a written settlement/compromise agreement is executed by the mediation
parties, then any/all of the mediation parties can deposit such written
settlement/compromise agreement with the RTC for latter's enforcement if any of the
mediation parties does not fully comply with the settled agreement
Comments:
Notice that all specific court reliefs are all filed via Petition filed with RTC - EXCEPT: For Rule 4 of
the Special ADR Rules, which is filed by "Motion" (to Refer the Case for ADR particularly
arbitration) filed with the court whether MTC/RTC depending where the action is pending
Note: The Rules on specific court reliefs insofar as they refer to arbitration - are also applicable
to Other ADR Forms (Rule 1.12 Special ADR Rules) – and relating Rule 1.12 with Rule 18.3:
“Applicability of rules on arbitration. – If other ADR form/process is more akin to arbitration [i.e.,
there is a neutral 3rd party is agreed by parties to render a binding resolution/decision], then the
rules on arbitration is applicable thereto”)
CHAPTER 12. - SPECIFIC COURT RELIEF particularly PETITION regarding
EXISTENCE, VALIDITY and ENFORCEABILITY of the "ARBITRATION
AGREEMENT" (Rule 3 Special ADR Rules)

 PRELIMINARY
The kind of arbitration where "arbitration agreement" is referring to under Rule 3 are
domestic arbitration, ICA arbitration or CIAC arbitration - where the place of arbitration is the
Philippines (Rule 3.1 Special ADR Rules). Unlike Motion to Refer the Action to ADR
(particularly arbitration) under Rule 4 Special ADR Rules, the place of arbitration can be in the
Philippines or abroad (Reason: Rule 4 Special ADR Rules does not distinguished whether the
place of arbitration which the court [RTC/MTC] will refer the action is in the Philippines or
abroad)

 (*) WHEN is this PETITION (regarding issues on the existence, validity or enforceability of
Arbitration Agreement) can be FILED with RTC (Rule 3.1 Special ADR Rules)
It can be filed with RTC whether before/after the commencement of the arbitration - BUT:
Only when the venue of arbitration is in the Philippines (i.e., regardless of the country where
the arbitration agreement was executed by the parties - so long as the venue or place of
arbitration is in the Philippines)
Comments:
(1) Commencement of Arbitration (Article 5.20 DOJ IRR)
In case of ad hoc arbitration, it is commenced by claimant by delivering to the respondent a
demand for arbitration. And in case of institutional arbitration, it commenced in accordance
with the rules of the ADR institution concerned (unless the parties agreed otherwise)
Note: "Ad hoc" ADR means it exists only while the purpose still exists (i.e., purpose is
arbitration), and when that purpose no longer exists (i.e., arbitration is already
finished/terminated), so also the ad hoc ADR; while an institutionalized ADR still exists despite
the arbitration for particular parties is already finished/terminated, viz., institutional
arbitration still exists to render its arbitration services to those other parties-to-be who would
like to procure its arbitration service (e.g., Philippine Dispute Resolution Center, Inc. [PDRCI]
an accredited ADR provider located in Taguig, MM)

 PETITION (regarding issues on the existence, validity or enforceability of Arbitration

Agreement) - "BEFORE" the ARBITRATION is COMMENCED
(1) Who can and when to file the Petition (Rule 3.2 in relation to Rule 3.3 Special ADR Rules)
 Any party to the arbitration agreement can file the Petition with RTC before the
commencement of the arbitration - and serving copy of the Petition to the respondent in
accordance with Rule 1.3 [A] Special ADR Rules (Note: The "Proof of Service" must be attached
to the Petition [Reason: The Petition is summary in nature])
(*) HOWEVER: Despite the pendency of the Petition with RTC, any of the parties can
commence the arbitration, arbitration constituted and the arbitral tribunal can continue
hearing the arbitration until the rendition of its arbitral award
(2) RTC venue (Rule 3.4 Special ADR Rules)
The Petition can be filed in RTC either (a) where the petitioner (or any of the petitioners) or
the respondent (or any of the respondents) has his principal place of business, or (2) where
petitioner (or any of the petitioners) or the respondent (or any of the respondents) has his
residence, - at the option of the petitioner
(3) (*) Grounds for the Petition (Rule 3.5 Special ADR Rules)
That the arbitration agreement is:
(a) Invalid
(b) Void
(c) Inexistent
(d) Unenforceable
Comments:
(a) That the arbitration agreement is "invalid"
(1) Arbitration agreement is "incapable of being performed"
Arbitration agreement is “incapable of being performed” as when it is too vaguely
worded so as it is incapable to determine what is the subject matter of the arbitration
agreement, or the intention of the parties cannot be determined whether to submit
their dispute to arbitration or not, or that the arbitration agreement contains “co-
equal forum selection clause” (i.e., there are 2/more arbitration venues from which
the parties could select) but the parties cannot unanimously agree as to where is the
arbitration venue, etc.
(b) That the arbitration agreement is "voidable" (Article 1390 NCC)
Such as when:
(1) One of the parties when he entered into agreement with the other party, was
incapable of giving consent (Note: When both parties are incapable of giving consent,
then the agreement is not voidable but rather unenforceable under Article 1403 [3]
NCC); or
(2) Consent of one of the parties in the agreement was vitiated by mistake, violence,
intimidation or undue influence
 (c) That the arbitration agreement is "void"
(1) Contrary to law, morals, good customs, public policy or public order
(2) Absolutely simulated (not merely relatively simulated contract)
(3) The subject-matter refers to things outside the commerce of men
(4) The subject-matter refers to service (physically or legally) impossible to perform
(d) That the arbitration agreement is "unenforceable"
Unenforceable contracts are those that are mentioned under Article 1403 NCC (e.g.,
arbitration agreement entered by a person without authority from the party, the
arbitration agreement is not in writing and signed by all parties, or all parties are
incapable of giving consent to the arbitration agreement)
Remedy: Ratification. Note: Void agreement/contract cannot be ratified as there is
nothing to ratify because such agreement/contract did not exist since the beginning
(e) That the arbitration agreement is "inexistent"
Meaning there is really no arbitration agreement, or that the petitioner is not privy to
the arbitration agreement
 Arbitration agreement becomes is "inoperative"
(a) The arbitration agreement contains period within which such agreement is
effective and such period already lapsed; or
(b) The parties previously validly revoked/rescinded their arbitration agreement
(4) Form and Contents of the Petition (Rule 3.6 Special ADR Rules)
The Petition must be verified(executed by person who has personal knowledge of the facts
alleged in such Petition [e.g., petitioner]), and shall state the following:
(a) That the petitioner and respondent has the capacity to sue and be sued;
(b) The nature and substance of the dispute
(c) The grounds and circumstances relied upon by the petitioner - to establish his case
(d) The relief/s prayed for by the petitioner
- AND: Attached with the Petition is the authentic copy of the arbitration agreement (asides
from other attachments [if any])
Note: The petitioner must serve copy of the Petition to the respondent considering that the
Petition is summary in nature pursuant to Rule 1.3 [A] Special ADR Rules. The Petition asides
from "Verification", must also state "Certificate Against Forum Shopping" pursuant to Rule
1.5 Special ADR Rules the Petition being an "initiatory pleading"
(5) Comment/Opposition by respondent against the Petition (Rule 3.7 Special ADR Rules)
Must be filed by the respondent within 15 days reckoned from his receipt of the Petition
(served by the Petitioner)
 Note: Unlike in Petition, the Comment/Opposition need not state "Verification" and
"Certificate Against Forum Shopping"
(6) (*) RTC in resolving the Petition (Rule 3.8 Special ADR Rules)
RTC must remember judicial restraint taking into consideration Rule the policy of
"Competence-Competence Principle" set forth under 2.4 Special ADR Rules giving the arbitral
tribunal the first opportunity to rule on the issue of its jurisdiction and competence to preside
over the arbitration dispute
 (*) Principle of "Competence-Competence" (Rule 2.4 Special ADR Rules)
When the Petition (flied with RTC) is about the issue of jurisdiction and/or competence of
the arbitral tribunal to hear the arbitration, including the issue with regards to the
inexistent or invalidity of the arbitration agreement - THEN: The RTC instead of ruling on
such issue, must exercise judicial restraint and give the arbitral tribunal the first
opportunity to resolve upon such issues
When the Petition is about the issue that the arbitration agreement is void, inoperative
or incapable of being performed - STILL: The RTC instead of ruling on such issue, must
also exercise judicial restraint (not about giving the arbitral tribunal the first opportunity
to hear the issue about its jurisdiction but rather) by way of giving prima facie validity of
the arbitration agreement - UNLESS: The RTC concludes that the arbitration agreement
is void, inoperative or incapable of being performed, then it will grant the Petition (and
order the arbitral tribunal to cease from taking cognizance of or continuing with the
arbitration if any already commenced)
 Petitioner's relief/remedy against RTC's finding of prima facie that the arbitration
agreement exists, valid or enforceable (Rule 3.11 Special ADR Rules)
The Petitioner cannot file MR, appeal or certiorari (viz., immediately executory)
(*) HOWEVER (i.e. no res judicata): The ruling of the RTC on the Petition being merely
prima facie finding for the existence, validity or enforceability of the arbitration
agreement, the Petitioner is not precluded from raising the same issues in the arbitral
tribunal (if the Petition is filed with RTC before the arbitration is commenced where the
RTC ruled on the Petition that the arbitral agreement exists, valid and enforceable, then
after such RTC decision, the arbitral tribunal is subsequently constituted and here, the
arbitral tribunal can rule on the same issue whether the arbitration agreement exists, valid
and enforceable), or in a Petition to Vacate/set-aside the Arbitral Award filed with RTC
(i.e., after the arbitral tribunal is constituted, the latter ruled that arbitration agreement
exists, valid and enforceable, afterwhich, arbitral tribunal rendered arbitral award,
afterwhich, the Petition to Vacate/Set-aside arbitral award is filed with RTC). (*) Now, in
the Petition to Vacate/Set-aside the Arbitral Award filed with RTC, when the issue raised
 is the same issue the arbitration agreement is inexistent, invalid or unenforceable, the
RTC will not merely rule based on prima facie finding but rather by conclusion via full
review of the said issue/s
(7) When the Petition is accompanied with application for interim measure of protection (Rule
3.10 Special ADR Rules)
The petitioner must also comply with the requirements of Rule 5 Special ADR Rules (i.e.,
regarding Petition for Interim Measure of Protection)

 PETITION (regarding issues on the existence, validity or enforceability of Arbitration

Agreement) - "AFTER" the ARBITRATION is COMMENCED (or pending the arbitration
proceedings)
(1) Who can and when to file the Petition (Rule 3.12 in relation to Rule 3.13 Special ADR Rules)
Any party to the arbitration agreement can file the Petition with RTC within 30 days reckoned
from his receipt of the ruling of the arbitral tribunal (finding for the existence/non-existence,
validity/invalidity or enforceability/unenforceability of the arbitration agreement)
(*) NOW: When the arbitral tribunal ruled that the arbitration agreement is inexistent, invalid
or unenforceable, but afterwhich the RTC ruled in the Petition reversed the ruling of the
arbitral tribunal (i.e., RTC ruling that the arbitration agreement exists, valid or enforceable),
then the parties have the option to replace the present arbitrator/s with new arbitrator/s
are to be appointed in the same procedure that the replaced arbitrator/s was appointed
Notes:
(a) The petitioner must serve his Petition to the respondent pursuant Rule 1.3 [A] Special ADR
Rules the Petition being a summary in nature
(b) (*) When Petition is not allowed to be filed with RTC (Rule 3.20 Special ADR Rules)
When one of the parties in the arbitration raised the issue in the arbitral tribunal that the
latter has no jurisdiction on ground that the arbitration agreement is inexistent, invalid or
unenforceable, but the arbitral tribunal issued an Order to defer ruling on such issue, the
questioning party cannot go to RTC and file Petition (to seek RTC ruling to declare the
arbitration agreement as inexistent, invalid or unenforceable) nor to question the
inappropriateness of arbitral tribunal deferring the ruling on such issue and compel the
arbitral tribunal through mandatory injunction to rule on such issue - IN WHICH CASE: The
questioning party cannot but wait until the arbitral tribunal renders arbitral award (before
he can file Petition with RTC to Vacate/Set-aside the Arbitral Award)
(2) RTC venue (Rule 3.14 Special ADR Rules)
The Petition can be filed in RTC either: (1) where arbitration is taking place, or (2) the
petitioner (or any of the petitioners) or the respondent (or any of the respondents) has his
 principal place of business, or (3) where petitioner (or any of the petitioners) or the
respondent (or any of the respondents) has his residence - all at the option of the petitioner
(3) Grounds for the Petition - when the arbitral tribunal ruled that the arbitration agreement
exists, valid or enforceable (Rule 3.15 Special ADR Rules)
That the arbitration agreement is:
(a) Invalid
(b) Inexistent
(c) Unenforceable
- AS A RESULT OF WHICH: The arbitral tribunal has no jurisdiction
Note: It is believed that the arbitration agreement is void/voidable should also be included
(2) Form and Contents of the Petition (Rule 3.16 Special ADR Rules)
The Petition must be verified (pursuant to Rule 1.4 Special ADR Rules; executed by person who
has personal knowledge of the facts alleged in such Petition [e.g., petitioner]), and shall state
the following:
(a) That the petitioner and respondent has the capacity to sue and be sued;
(b) The nature and substance of the dispute
(c) The grounds and circumstances relied upon by the petitioner - to establish his case
(d) The relief/s prayed for by the petitioner
- AND: Attached with the Petitioner is the copy of the demand for arbitration and the ruling
of the arbitral tribunal (asides from other attachments [if any])
The arbitrators must be impleaded in the Petition also as respondent but merely as nominal
party, and they are also entitled to notices of the progress of the Petition (Note: A "nominal
party" is otherwise known as "pro forma" party, is a party joined in the action/petition as
plaintiff/petitioner or as defendant/respondent but has no real interest in the action/petition,
but merely impleaded because the rules require him to be impleaded and nothing more)
Notes:
(1) The petitioner must serve copy of the Petition to the respondent considering that the
Petition is summary in nature pursuant to Rule 1.3 [A] Special ADR Rules. The Petition
asides from "Verification", must also state "Certificate Against Forum Shopping" pursuant
to Rule 1.5 Special ADR Rules the Petition being an "initiatory pleading"
(2) The arbitral tribunal is only a nominal party (Rule 3.22 Special ADR Rule)
The petitioner in his Petition must implead the arbitral tribunal also as respondent (along
with the respondent-party) but merely as nominal party - such that it will not be required
by RTC to submit any pleadings/papers to the Petition - HOWEVER: The RTC may allow
the arbitral tribunal to participate in the Petition and file pleadings/papers but still as
nominal party(Note: A "nominal party" is otherwise known as "pro forma" party, is a party
 joined in the action/petition as plaintiff/petitioner or as defendant/respondent but has no
real interest in the action/petition, but merely impleaded because the rules require him to
be impleaded and nothing more)
(4) Comment/Opposition by respondent against the Petition (Rule 3.17 Special ADR Rules)
Must be filed by the respondent within 15 days reckoned from his receipt of the Petition
(served by the Petitioner)
Note: Just like in Petition, the Comment/Opposition must include "Verification" (Rule 1.4) –
but need not include "Certificate Against Forum Shopping" being not an initiatory pleading
(Rule 1.5)
(5) The RTC in resolving the Petition (Rule 3.18 Special ADR Rules)
(a) Period within which RTC shall decide on the Petition
Within 30 days reckoned from the time the Petition is submitted for decision - which
decision is merely on the basis of the pleadings and evidence of the parties (Note: No
formal oral hearing in RTC on reason that the Petition is summary in nature under Rule 1.3
[a] Special ADR Rules)
Note: Pleadings consists of Petition of the petitioner, Comment/Opposition of the
respondent, and the respective legal briefs of the parties (Note: Legal brief - is a pleading
containing facts, factual and legal issues, citation of legal authorities [i.e., applicable laws
and jurisprudence], and other matters arose during the proceedings; Rule 1.11 [e] Special
ADR Rules)
(b) (*) RTC pending the Petition, cannot issue TRO/Injunction against the arbitral tribunal
Despite the filing of Petition with RTC, the latter cannot enjoin the arbitral tribunal from
continuing with the arbitration proceedings - and in fact during Petition pendency, the
arbitral tribunal can even render arbitral award
(c) (*) When can the RTC dismiss the Petition
When the Petition:
(1) Fails to comply with Rule 3.16 Special ADR Rules (i.e., contents of Petition); or
(2) When on the basis of the respective legal briefs of the parties - the Petition does not
appear to be prima facie meritorious
(6) Relief/remedy against RTC Ruling - either granting/dismissing the Petition (Rule 3.19 Special
ADR Rules)
The aggrieved party (whether petitioner or respondent as the case may be) can file MR- BUT:
Cannot appeal
When RTC declares that the arbitration agreement exists, valid or enforceable - such ruling
cannot be subjected to certiorari
 When RTC declares that the arbitration agreement is inexistent, invalid or unenforceable -
such ruling can be subjected to certiorari under Rule 19.26 Special ADR Rules
 (*) Suppose the arbitral tribunal rendered arbitral award - before the RTC could rule on the
Petition (Rule 3.21 Special ADR Rule)
The RTC shall dismiss the being already rendered moot and academic - BUT: Without
prejudice to any of the parties to file later with RTC a Petition to Vacate/Set-aside the arbitral
award