SUGGESTED ANSWERS TO document or the truth of any material and

2016 REMEDIAL LAW BAR EXAM relevant matter of fact.

2. Each of the matters of which an admission is
I requested shall be deemed admitted unless,
within the period designated in the request,
State at least five (5) civil cases that fall under the which shall not be less than 15 days after service
exclusive original jurisdiction of the Regional Trial thereof, the party to whom the request is directed
Courts (RTCs). (5%) files and serves upon the requesting party a
sworn statement either denying specifically the
SUGGESTED ANSWER: matters of which an admission is requested or
The following civil cases fall under the exclusive original setting forth in detail why he cannot truthfully
jurisdiction of the RTCs: either admit or deny those matter.
1. Actions where the demand or the value of the property 3. Objections to any request for admission shall be
in controversy exceeds P300,000, or, in Metro Manila, submitted to the court within the period for and
P400,000, exclusive of damages, attorneys fees, prior to the filing of his sworn statement. The
litigation expenses, interests, and costs. effect of the failure to file and serve request for
2. Real actions where the assessed value of the real admission is that, unless allowed by the court for
property involved exceeds P20,000, or in Metro good cause shown and to prevent a failure of
Manila, P50,000. justice, a party who fails to file and serve a
3. Actions whose subject matter is incapable of request for admission on the adverse party of
pecuniary estimation. material and relevant facts at issue which are, or
4. Probate cases where the gross value of the estate ought to be, within the personal knowledge of the
exceeds P300,000, or in Metro Manila, P400,000. latter, shall not be allowed to present evidence on
5. Actions not falling within the exclusive jurisdiction of such facts.
any other court, tribunal, body, or person, exercising
judicial or quasi-judicial functions.
III

II What are the contents of a judicial affidavit? (5%)

(a) Briefly explain the procedure on "Interrogatories SUGGESTED ANSWER:

to Parties" under Rule 25 and state the effect of The contents of a judicial affidavit are as follows:
failure to serve written interrogatories. (2.5%) (a) The name, age, residence or business address, and
(b) Briefly explain the procedure on "Admission by occupation of the witness;
Adverse Party" under Rule 26 and the effect of (b) The name and address of the lawyer who conducts or
failure to file and serve the request. (2.5%) supervises the examination of the witness and the
place where the examination is being held;
SUGGESTED ANSWER: (c) A statement that the witness is answering the
(a) The procedure on Interrogatories to Parties under questions asked of him, fully conscious that he does
Rule 25 is briefly explained as follows: so under oath, and that he may face criminal liability
1. A party desiring to elicit material and relevant for false testimony or perjury;
facts from an adverse party shall file and serve (d) Questions asked of the witness and his corresponding
upon the latter written interrogatories to be answers, consecutively numbered, that:
answered by the latter. (1) Show the circumstances under which the witness
2. The interrogatories shall be answered fully in acquired the facts upon which he testifies;
writing and shall be signed and sworn to by the (2) Elicit from him those facts which are relevant to
person making them. The interrogatories shall be the issues that the case presents; and
answered within 15 days from service thereof. The (3) Identify the attached documentary and object
answers may be used for the same purposes evidence and establish their authenticity in
provided for in Section 4 of Rule 23 on accordance with the Rules of Court;
depositions. (e) The signature of the witness over his printed name;
3. 3. Objections to any interrogatories may be made and
within 10 days after service thereof. The effect of (f) A jurat with the signature of the notary public who
the failure to serve written interrogatories is that administers the oath or an officer who is authorized
unless allowed by the court for good cause shown by law to administer the same.
and to prevent a failure of justice, a party not
served with written interrogatories may not be
compelled by the adverse party to give testimony IV
in open court, or to give a deposition pending
appeal. Eduardo, a resident of the City of Manila, filed before
the Regional Trial Court (RTC) of Manila a complaint
(b) The procedure on Admission by Adverse Party under for the annulment of a Deed of Real Estate Mortgage
Rule 25 is briefly explained as follows: he signed in favor of Galaxy Bank (Galaxy), and the
1. At any time after issues have been joined, a party consequent foreclosure and auction sale of his
may file and serve upon any other party a written mortgaged Makati property. Galaxy filed a Motion to
request for the admission by the latter of the Dismiss on the ground of improper venue alleging that
genuineness of any material and relevant the complaint should be filed with the RTC of Makati
since the complaint involves the ownership and
possession of Eduardo's lot. Resolve the motion with SUGGESTED ANSWER:
reasons. (5%) As MTC judge, I would deny the motion to dismiss. Under
the Rules of Procedure for Small Claims Cases, a motion
SUGGESTED ANSWER: to dismiss on whatever ground is a prohibited motion.
The motion to dismiss on the ground of improper venue Here the complaint falls under the coverage of the Rules
should be granted. of Procedure for Small Claims Cases since the claim for
sum of money did not exceed P100,000. Hence the motion
Under the Rules of Civil Procedure, the venue of real to dismiss filed by Pedro is a prohibited motion and
actions shall be with the proper court having jurisdiction should thus be denied.
over the area where the real property involved is situated.
An action for annulment of mortgage is a real action if [Note: Threshold amount was subsequently increased to
there has already been a foreclosure sale. (See Chua v. P200,000]
Total Office Products and Services, 30 September 2005).

Here there was already a foreclosure sale. Hence the VII

action for annulment of mortgage is a real action which
should have been filed in Makati where the real property Spouses Marlon and Edith have three (3) children ages
is situated. 15, 12 and 7, who are studying at public schools. They
have a combined gross monthly income of P30,000.00
and they stay in an apartment in Manila with a
V monthly rent of P5,000.00. The monthly minimum
wage per employee in Metro Manila does not exceed
(a) What is the "most important witness" rule P13,000.00. They do not own any real property. The
pursuant to the 2004 Guidelines of Pretrial and spouses want to collect a loan of P25,000.00 from Jojo
Use of Deposition-Discovery Measures? Explain. but do not have the money to pay the filing fees.
(2.5%)
(b) What is the "one day examination of witness" rule (a) Would the spouses qualify as indigent litigants
pursuant to the said 2004 Guidelines? Explain. under Section 19, Rule 141 on Legal Fees? (2.5%)
(2.5%) (b) If the spouses do not qualify under Rule 141, what
other remedy can they avail of under the rules to
SUGGESTED ANSWER: exempt them from paying the filing fees? (2.5%)
(a) The most important witness rule pursuant to the
2004 Guidelines of Pretrial and Use of Deposition- SUGGESTED ANSWER:
Discovery Measures provides that the judge shall, (a) No, the spouses would not qualify as indigent litigants
during the pretrial conference, determine the most under Section 19, Rule 141 since their combined
important witnesses to be heard and limit the number gross monthly income of P30,000 exceeds P26,000,
of witnesses. the amount double the monthly minimum wage.

(b) The one-day examination of a witness rule pursuant (b) The other remedy the spouses can avail of under the
to the 2004 Guidelines of Pretrial and Use of rules to exempt them from paying the filing fees is to
Deposition-Discovery Measures provides that a apply for exemption pursuant to the indigency test
witness has to be fully examined in one day only, under Section 21, Rule 3 of the Rules of Court if they
subject to the courts discretion to extend the direct can prove that they have no money or property
and/or cross-examination for justifiable reasons. sufficient and available for food, shelter and basic
necessities for [themselves] and their family. (Sps.
Algura v. City of Naga, 30 October 2006).
VI

Pedro and Juan are residents of Barangay Ifurug, VIII

Municipality of Dupac, Mountain Province. Pedro owes
Juan the amount of P50,000.00. Due to nonpayment, Juan sued Roberto for specific performance. Roberto
Juan brought his complaint to the Council of Elders knew that Juan was going to file the case so he went
of said barangay which implements the bodong justice out of town and temporarily stayed in another city to
system. Both appeared before the council where they avoid service of summons. Juan engaged the services
verbally agreed that Pedro will pay in installments on of Sheriff Matinik to serve the summons but when the
specific due dates. Pedro reneged on his promise. latter went to the residence of Roberto, he was told by
Juan filed a complaint for sum of money before the the caretaker thereof that his employer no longer
Municipal Trial Court (MTC). Pedro filed a Motion to resides at the house. The caretaker is a high school
Dismiss on the ground that the case did not pass graduate and is the godson of Roberto. Believing the
through the barangay conciliation under R.A. No. caretaker's story to be true, Sheriff Matinik left a copy
7160 and that the RTC, not the MTC, has jurisdiction. of the summons and complaint with the caretaker.
In his opposition, Juan argued that the intervention Was there a valid substituted service of summons?
of the Council of Elders is substantial compliance with Discuss the requirements for a valid service of
the requirement of R.A. No. 7160 and the claim of summons. (5%)
P50,000.00 is clearly within the jurisdiction of the
MTC. As MTC judge, rule on the motion and explain. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
(5%) Yes, there was a valid service of summons.
In a case involving similar facts, the Supreme Court held of writ of possession with the RTC pursuant to Section
that there was a valid substituted service of summons 7 of Act No. 3135. (Navarra v. CA, 204 SCRA 850).
since the defendant was engaged in deception to thwart
the orderly administration of justice. (c) Yes. The Supreme Court has held that a transferee of
the purchaser or winning bidder may file an ex parte
Here the defendant was also engaged in deception since motion for the issuance of a writ of possession. The
he temporarily stayed in another city to avoid service of reason is that the transferee steps into the shoes of
summons and his caretaker falsely said he no longer the purchaser and acquires whatever rights the
resides in the house. (Sagana v. Francisco, 2 Oct 2009). transferor had. (Laureno v. Bormaheco, 404 Phil. 80).

The requirements for a valid substituted service of

summons are: X
1. The defendant, for justifiable reasons, cannot be
personally served with summons within a reasonable Hannibal, Donna, Florence and Joel, concerned
time. residents of Laguna de Bay, filed a complaint for
2. Copies of the summons shall be left at the defendants mandamus against the Laguna Lake Development
residence with some person of suitable age and Authority, the Department of Environment and
discretion residing therein, or by leaving the copies at Natural Resources, the Department of Public Work and
defendants office or regular place of business with Highways, Department of Interior and Local
some competent person in charge thereof. Government, Department of Agriculture, Department
of Budget, and Philippine National Police before the
[Note: The call should be read as referring only to a valid RTC of Laguna alleging that the continued neglect of
substituted service of summons; otherwise the answer defendants in performing their duties has resulted in
would be kilometric as there are several ways to serve serious deterioration of the water quality of the lake
summons under Rule 14] and the degradation of the marine life in the lake. The
plaintiffs prayed that said government agencies be
ordered to clean up Laguna de Bay and restore its
IX water quality to Class C waters as prescribed by
Presidential Decree No. 1152, otherwise known as the
(a) Is the buyer in the auction sale arising from an Philippine Environment Code. Defendants raise the
extra-judicial foreclosure entitled to a writ of defense that the cleanup of the lake is not a
possession even before the expiration of the ministerial function and they cannot be compelled by
redemption period? If so, what is the action to be mandamus to perform the same. The RTC of Laguna
taken? (1%) rendered a decision declaring that it is the duty of the
(b) After the period of redemption has lapsed and the agencies to clean up Laguna de Bay and issued a
title to the lot is consolidated in the name of the permanent writ of mandamus ordering said agencies
auction buyer, is he entitled to the writ of to perform their duties prescribed by law relating to
possession as a matter of right? If so, what is the the cleanup of Laguna de Bay.
action to be taken? (2%)
(c) Suppose that after the title to the lot has been (a) Is the RTC correct in issuing the writ of
consolidated in the name of the auction buyer, mandamus? Explain. (2.5%)
said buyer sold the lot to a third party without (b) What is the writ of continuing mandamus? (2.5%)
first getting a writ of possession. Can the
transferee exercise the right of the auction buyer SUGGESTED ANSWER:
and claim that it is a ministerial duty of the court (a) Yes, the RTC is correct. In MMDA v. Concerned
to issue a writ of possession in his favor? Briefly Residents of Manila Bay, 18 December 2008, the SC
explain. (2%) held that the cleaning or rehabilitation of Manila Bay
can be compelled by mandamus. The ruling in MMDA
SUGGESTED ANSWER: may be applied by analogy to the clean-up of the
(a) Yes, under Section 7 of Act No. 3135, the buyer in Laguna de Bay. While the term issued by the RTC of
such auction sale is entitled to a writ of possession Laguna is a permanent writ of mandamus, this
even before the expiration of the redemption period. should be considered only as a semantic error and
The action to be taken is to file an ex parte petition for that what the RTC really intended to issue is a writ of
a writ of possession with the RTC furnishing a bond continuing mandamus. There is no such thing as a
to the debtor. Upon approval of the bond, the buyer permanent writ of mandamus since the writ shall
would be entitled to the issuance of a writ of cease to be effective once the judgment is fully
possession. Also under Section 47 of the General satisfied.
Banking Law, the purchaser at a judicial or
extrajudicial foreclosure sale where the mortgagee is (b) The writ of continuing mandamus is a writ issued by
a bank shall have the right to enter and take a court in an environmental case directing any agency
possession of the property immediately after the date or instrumentality of the government or officer thereof
of the confirmation of the auction sale. to perform an act or series of acts decreed by final
judgment which shall remain effective until judgment
(b) Yes, the buyer is entitled to the writ of possession as is fully satisfied.
a matter of right. After consolidation of ownership, a
writ of possession will issue as a matter of course,
without the filing and approval of a bond. The action
to be taken is to file an ex parte petition for issuance
 XI XIII

Miguel filed a Complaint for damages against Jose, The officers of "Ang Kapaligiran ay Alagaan, Inc."
who denied liability and filed a Motion to Dismiss on engaged your services to file an action against ABC
the ground of failure to state a cause of action. In an Mining Corporation which is engaged in mining
Order received by Jose on January 5, 2015, the trial operations in Sta. Cruz, Marinduque. ABC used highly
court denied the Motion to Dismiss. On February 4, toxic chemicals in extracting gold. ABC's toxic mine
2015, Jose sought reconsideration of that Order tailings were accidentally released from its storage
through a Motion for Reconsideration. Miguel opposed dams and were discharged into the rivers of said town.
the Motion for Reconsideration on the ground that it The mine tailings found their way to Calancan Bay and
was filed out of time. Jose countered that the 15-day allegedly to the waters of nearby Romblon and
rule under Section 1 of Rule 52 does not apply where Quezon. The damage to the crops and loss of earnings
the Order sought to be reconsidered is an were estimated at P1 Billion. Damage to the
interlocutory order that does not attain finality. Is environment is estimated at P1 Billion. As lawyer for
Jose correct? Explain. (5%) the organization, you are requested to explain the
advantages derived from a petition for writ of
SUGGESTED ANSWER: kalikasan before the Supreme Court over a complaint
Yes, Jose is correct. The 15-day period to file a motion for for damages before the RTC of Marinduque or vice-
reconsideration under Section 1 of Rule 52 refers to a versa. What action will you recommend? Explain. (5%)
motion for reconsideration of a judgment or final
resolution or order. SUGGESTED ANSWER:
I will recommend the filing of a Petition for the issuance
Here what is involved is an order denying a motion to of a Writ of Kalikasan. The following are the advantages of
dismiss, which is not a final order as it does not terminate such a petition over a civil complaint for damages.
the case. The order is simply an interlocutory order which
may be reconsidered by the trial court at any time during Firstly there will be no issue regarding the legal standing
the pendency of the case. or legal capacity of the Ang Kapaligiran ay Alagaan Inc.
(AKAI) to file the action. Section 1, Rule 7 of the Rules of
Procedure for Environmental Cases (RPEC) provides that
XII the writ of Kalikasan is available to a peoples
organization, non-governmental organization, or any
Tailors Toto, Nelson and Yenyen filed a special civil public interest group. On the other hand, the legal
action for certiorari under Rule 65 from an adverse capacity of AKAI to file an action for damages in behalf of
decision of the National Labor Relations Commission its members may be questioned since a corporation has a
(NLRC) on the complaint for illegal dismissal against personality separate from that of its members.
Empire Textile Corporation. They were terminated on
the ground that they failed to meet the prescribed Secondly, the petitioner in a petition for writ of kalikasan
production quota at least four (4) times. The NLRC is exempt from the payment of docket fees unlike in a civil
decision was assailed in a special civil action under complaint for damages.
Rule 65 before the Court of Appeals (CA). In the
verification and certification against forum shopping, Thirdly in a petition for writ of kalikasan, the petitioners
only Toto signed the verification and certification, may avail of the precautionary principle in environmental
while Atty. Arman signed for Nelson. Empire filed a cases which provides that when human activities may
motion to dismiss on the ground of defective lead to threats of serious and irreversible damage to the
verification and certification. Decide with reasons. environment that is scientifically plausible but uncertain,
(5%) action shall be taken to avoid or diminish that threat. In
effect, the precautionary principle shifts the burden of
SUGGESTED ANSWER: evidence of harm away from those likely to suffer harm
The motion to dismiss on the ground of defective and onto those desiring to change the status quo. In a civil
verification should be denied. The Supreme Court has complaint for damages, the burden of proof to show
held that a lawyer may verify a pleading in behalf of the damages is on the plaintiff.
client. Moreover a verification is merely a formal and not
a jurisdictional requirement. The court should not Finally, the judgment is a writ of kalikasan case is
dismiss the case but merely require the party concerned immediately executory unlike in a civil complaint for
to rectify the defect. The motion to dismiss on the ground damages. The advantage of the civil complaint for
of defective certification against forum-shopping should damages is that the court may award damages to the
likewise be denied. Under reasonable or justifiable Petitioners for the injury suffered which is not the case in
circumstances, as when all the plaintiffs or petitioners a petition for writ of kalikasan. At any rate a person who
share a common interest and invoke a common cause of avails of the Writ of Kalikasan may also file a separate suit
action or defense, the signature of only one of them in the for the recovery of damages.
certification against forum shopping substantially
complies with the Rule. (Jacinto v. Gumaru, 2 June 2014).
XIV
Here the Petitioners have a common interest and invoke a
common cause of action, that is, their illegal dismissal by Pedro, the principal witness in a criminal case,
Empire Textile Corporation for failure to meet production testified and completed his testimony on direct
quotas. examination in 2015. Due to several postponements
by the accused, grounded on his recurring illness,
which were all granted by the judge, the cross- (b) What does "personal knowledge of the facts and
examination of Pedro was finally set on October 15, circumstances that the person to be arrested
2016. Before the said date, Pedro died. The accused committed it" mean? (2.5%)
moved to expunge Pedro's testimony on the ground
that it violates his right of confrontation and the right SUGGESTED ANSWER:
to cross-examine the witness. The prosecution (a) The arrest must be made within 24 hours after the
opposed the motion and asked that Pedro's testimony commission of the crime. Where the arrest took place
on direct examination be admitted as evidence. Is the a day after the commission of the crime, it cannot be
motion meritorious? Explain. (5%) said that an offense has just been committed. (People
v. Del Rosario, 305 SCRA 740).
SUGGESTED ANSWER:
No, the motion to expunge Pedros testimony on the (b) "Personal knowledge of the facts and circumstances
ground that it violates the accuseds right to confront the that the person to be arrested committed it" means
witness is not meritorious. The Supreme Court has held personal knowledge not of the commission of the
that where the delay in cross-examining the witness was crime itself but of facts and circumstances which
imputable to the accused, he could not be heard to would lead to the conclusion that the person to be
complain if the witness becomes unavailable through no arrested has probably committed the crime. Such
fault of the party presenting the witness and hence the personal knowledge arises from reasonably worthy
witnesss direct examination should not be stricken out. information in the arresting persons possession
Here the delay in cross-examining Pedro was imputable to coupled with his own observation and fair inferences
the motions for postponement and the death of Pedro was therefrom that the person arrested has probably
not the fault of the prosecution. committed the offense. (Pestilos v. Generoso, 739
SCRA 337).

XV
XVII
Chika sued Gringo, a Venezuelan, for a sum of money.
The Metropolitan Trial Court of Manila (MeTC) The information against Roger Alindogan for the
rendered a decision ordering Gringo to pay Chika crime of acts of lasciviousness under Article 336 of
P50,000.00 plus legal interest. During its pendency of the Revised Penal Code avers: "That on or about 10:30
the appeal before the RTC, Gringo died of acute o'clock in the evening of February 1, 2010 at Barangay
hemorrhagic pancreatitis. Atty. Perfecto, counsel of Matalaba, Imus, Cavite and within the jurisdiction of
Gringo, filed a manifestation attaching the death this Honorable Court, the above-named accused, with
certificate of Gringo and informing the RTC that he lewd and unchaste design, through force and
cannot substitute the heirs since Gringo did not intimidation, did then and there, wilfully, unlawfully
disclose any information on his family. As counsel for and feloniously commit sexual abuse on his daughter,
Chika, what remedy can you recommend to your Rose Domingo, a minor of 11 years old, either by
client so the case can move forward and she can raping her or committing acts of lasciviousness on
eventually recover her money? Explain. (5%) her, against her will and consent to her damage and
prejudice. ACTS CONTRARY TO LAW." The accused
SUGGESTED ANSWER: wants to have the case dismissed because he believes
The remedy I can recommend to my client Chika is to file that the charge is confusing and the information is
a petition for settlement of the estate of Gringo and for the defective. What ground or grounds can he raise in
appointment of an administrator. Chika as a creditor is moving for the quashal of the information? Explain.
an interested person who can file the petition for (5%)
settlement of Gringos estate. Once the administrator is
appointed, I will move that the administrator be SUGGESTED ANSWER:
substituted as the defendant. I will also file my claim The grounds which the accused can raise in moving for
against Gringo as a contingent claim in the probate the quashal of the information are the following:
proceedings pursuant to Rule 86 of the Rules of Court. 1. THE INFORMATION CHARGES MORE THAN ONE
OFFENSE. The information charges two offenses, that
is, rape and sexual abuse. Worse, the charges are
XVI stated in the alternative, making it unclear to the
accused as to what offense exactly he is being charged
Under Section 5, Rule 113 a warrantless arrest is with.
allowed when an offense has just been committed and 2. THE INFORMATION DOES NOT CONFORM
the peace officer has probable cause to believe, based SUBSTANTIALLY TO THE REQUIRED FORM. The
on his personal knowledge of facts or circumstances, information merely states that the accused committed
that the person to be arrested has committed it. A acts of lasciviousness upon the victim without
policeman approaches you for advice and asks you specifying what those acts of lasciviousness were.
how he will execute a warrantless arrest against a
murderer who escaped after killing a person. The
policeman arrived two (2) hours after the killing and a XVIII
certain Max was allegedly the killer per information
given by a witness. He asks you to clarify the John filed a petition for declaration of nullity of his
following: marriage to Anne on the ground of psychological
(a) How long after the commission of the crime can incapacity under Article 36 of the Family Code. He
he still execute the warrantless arrest? (2.5%) obtained a copy of the confidential psychiatric
evaluation report on his wife from the secretary of the While Jojo is correct is saying that the action for
psychiatrist. Can he testify on the said report without reconveyance is in personam (Republic v. CA, 315 SCRA
offending the rule on privileged communication? 600, 606), the test of whether an action is covered by S15
Explain. (5%) R14 is not its technical characterization as in rem or quasi
in rem but whether it is among those mentioned in S15
SUGGESTED ANSWER: R14. (See Baltazar v. Court of Appeals, 168 SCRA 354,
Yes, John can testify on the psychiatric report without 363).
offending the rule on privileged communication.

In a case involving similar facts, the Supreme Court held XX

that there is no violation of physician-patient privilege
since the one testifying is not the psychiatrist. The Royal Bank (Royal) filed a complaint for a sum of
privilege bars only the physician, not other persons. money against Ervin and Jude before the RTC of
(Krohn v. Court of Appeals, 233 SCRA 146). Manila. The initiatory pleading averred that on
February 14, 2010, Ervin obtained a loan from Royal
There is no violation of marital communication privilege in the amount of Pl Million, as evidenced by
since the report is not a confidential communication Promissory Note No. 007 (PN) signed by Ervin. Jude
between spouses. signed a Surety Agreement binding herself as surety
for the loan. Royal made a final demand on February
There is also no violation of the marital disqualification 14, 2015 for Ervin and Jude (defendants) to pay, but
rule since the case involves an exception, that is, a civil the latter failed to pay. Royal prayed that defendants
case by one spouse against the other. Ervin and Jude be ordered to pay the amount of P1
Million plus interests. In their answer, Ervin admitted
that he obtained the loan from Royal and signed the
XIX PN. Jude also admitted that she signed the Surety
Agreement. Defendants pointed out that the PN did
Tristan filed a suit with the RTC of Pasay against not provide the due date for payment, and that the
Arthur King and/or Estate of Arthur King for loan has not yet matured as the maturity date was left
reconveyance of a lot declared in the name of Arthur blank to be agreed upon by the parties at a later date.
King under TCT No. 1234. The complaint alleged that Defendants filed a Motion for a Judgment on the
"on account Arthur King's residence abroad up to the Pleadings on the ground that there is no genuine issue
present and the uncertainty of whether he is still alive presented by the parties' submissions. Royal opposed
or dead, he or his estate may be served with summons the motion on the ground that the PN' s maturity is
by publication." Summons was published and nobody an issue that must be threshed out during trial.
filed any responsive pleading within sixty (60) days
therefrom. Upon motion, defendants were declared in (a) Resolve the motion with reasons. (2.5%)
default and judgment was rendered declaring Tristan (b) Distinguish "Summary Judgment" and "Judgment
as legal owner and ordering defendants to reconvey on the Pleadings." (2.5%)
said lot to Tristan. Jojo, the court-designated
administrator of Arthur King's estate, filed a petition SUGGESTED ANSWER:
for annulment of judgment before the CA praying that (a) The Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings should be
the decision in favor of Tristan be declared null and denied.
void for lack of jurisdiction. He claims that the action
filed by Tristan is an action in personam and that the Under the Rules of Civil Procedure, a judgment on the
court did not acquire jurisdiction over defendants pleadings is not proper if the answer tenders an issue.
Arthur King and/or his estate. On the other hand,
Tristan claims that the suit is an action in rem or at Here a period was intended but it was not fixed as
least an action quasi in rem. Is the RTC judge correct shown by the fact that the maturity date of the
in ordering service of summons by publication? promissory note was left blank. (Art. 1197, Civil
Explain. (5%) Code). The answer thus tendered an issue, that is, the
promissory note was not yet due as the parties had
SUGGESTED ANSWER: not yet agreed upon the period or the maturity date.
Yes, the RTC judge is correct in ordering service of
summons by publication. (b) A summary judgment is distinguished from a
judgment on the pleadings as follows:
Under S15 R14, extraterritorial service, which includes 1. A summary judgment is proper even if there is a
service by publication, may be availed of in actions the remaining issue as to the amount of damages,
subject of which is property within the Philippines in while a judgment on the pleadings is proper if it
which the defendant has or claims a lien or interest or in appears that there is no genuine issue between
which the relief demanded consists in excluding the the parties.
defendant from any interest therein. 2. A summary judgment is based not only on the
pleadings but also upon affidavits, depositions,
Here the action for reconveyance has for its subject a real and admissions showing that, except as to the
property in the Philippines in the defendants name and amount of damages, there is no genuine issue,
in which the relief sought is to annul the defendants title while a judgment on the pleadings is based
and vest it in the plaintiff. exclusively upon the pleadings without the
presentation of any evidence.
3. A motion for summary judgment requires 10-day
notice (S3 R35), while a motion for judgment on
the pleadings is subject to a 3-day notice rule (S4
R15).
4. A summary judgment may be prayed for by a
defending party (S2 R35), while a judgment on the
pleadings may be prayed for only by a plaintiff or
claimant.