1991 Revised Rule on Summary Procedure (Civil Cases -- Notes)

 I. Applicability

  1. Scope -- governs summary procedure in MeTC, MTC in Cities, MTC, MCTS in the following cases:
    • cases of forcible entry and unlawful detainer
      • irrespective of the amount of damages or unpaid rentals sought to be recovered
      • attorney's fees awarded -- not exceeding Php 20,000.00
    • other civil cases
      • except: probate proceedings
        • where total amount of plaintiff's claim does not exceed Php 10,000.00, EXCLUSIVE of interest and costs
  2. Determination of Applicability (Section 2)
    • the court shall issue an order declaring whether or not the case shall be governed by this rule -- upon filing of a civil or criminal action
    • patently erroneous determination to AVOID the application of this ground
      • ground for disciplinary action
  3. Pleadings (Section 3)
    • The only allowed pleadings allowed to be filed:
      • complaints
      • compulsory counterclaims
      • cross-claims pleaded in the answer
      • answers
    • all pleadings shall be verified
  4. Duty of Court (Section 4) -- court must first determine that the case falls under summary procedure
    • from an examination of allegations and evidence attached:
      • dismiss the case
        • on any grounds apparent for the dismissal of a civil action
      • issue summons
        • if no ground of dismissal is found
        • it shall state that the summary procedure under this rule applies
  5. Answer (Section 5)
    • When shall the defendant file his answer to the complaint?
      • the defendant shall file his answer within 10 days from service of summons and serve a copy thereof on the plaintiff
    • affirmative and negative defenses >> not pleaded >> DEEMED WAIVED
      • except: lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter
    • cross-claims and compulsory counterclaims >> not asserted in the answer >> CONSIDERED BARRED
    • answer to counterclaims or cross-claims shall be filed and served within 10 days from service of the answer in which they are pleaded
  6. Effect of Failure to Answer (Section 6)
    • defendant >> failed to answer within 10 days >> court >> motu proprio or on motion of plaintiff >> shall render judgment as may be warranted by the facts alleged in the complaint >> limited to what is prayed for therein
    • PROVIDED:
      • court may in its discretion reduce the amount of damages and attorney's fees claimed
        • when excessive or unconscionable
        • without prejudice to the applicability of Section 4, Rule 15 (if there are 2/more defendants)
  7. Preliminary Conference (Section 7)
    • it shall be held after 30 days after the last answer is filed
    • rules on pre-trial in ordinary cases shall be applied
      • except: when inconsistent with provisions of this rule
  8. Appearance of Parties (Section 7)
    • failure of plaintiff to appear in the preliminary conference
      • cause for the dismissal of his complaint
      • defendant who appears in the absence of plaintiff >> entitled to judgment on his counterclaim (in accordance with Sec 6 -- effect of failure to file answer)
      • cross-claims >> DISMISSED
    • failure of sole defendant to appear
      • plaintiff >> entitled to judgment (in accordance with Sec 6 -- effect of failure to file answer)
      • rule does not apply WHERE 2/more defendants sued under a common cause of action who had pleaded a common defense shall appear at the preliminary conference
  9. Record of Preliminary Conference (Section 8)
    • after the termination of preliminary conference >> WITHIN 5 DAYS >> the court shall issue an order stating the matters taken up: (including but not limited to)
      • whether parties arrived at an amicable settlement
        • yes? terms should be stated
      • stipulations/admissions entered into by parties
      • whether judgment may be rendered without need of further proceedings
        • on the basis of the pleadings and stipulations and admissions made by parties
        • judgment shall be rendered within 30 days from issuance of order
      • clear specification of material facts which remain uncontroverted
      • other matters intended to expedite disposition of case
  10. Submission of Affidavits and Position Papers (Section 9)
    • shall be submitted within 10 days FROM receipt of the order (which will be mentioned in the next preceding section)
    • parties shall submit the affidavits of their witnesses and other evidence on the FACTUAL issues defined in the order together with their position papers setting forth the law and the facts relied upon them
        • in sum: what shall the parties submit?
            • affidavits of their witnesses
            • other evidence on factual issues (should be based or defined in the ORDER)
            • position papers
            • facts relied upon them
  11. Rendition of Judgment (Section 10)
    • When shall the court render judgment?
      • within 30 days after receipt of or during the expiration of the period for filing the following:
        1. last affidavits
        2. position papers
    • except: when the court finds it necessary to clarify certain material facts
      • during said period -- issue an order specifying the matters to be clarified and require the parties to submit affidavits or other evidence on said matters within 10 days from receipt of order
    • Judgment shall be rendered within 15 days after receipt of clarificatory affidavits (or the expiration of filing the same)
    • COURT SHALL NOT RESORT TO CLARIFICATORY PROCEDURE TO GAIN TIME FOR THE RENDITION OF THE JUDGMENT
II. Common Provisions
  1. Referral to Lupon (Section 18)
    • cases requiring referral to Lupon for conciliation purposes under the provisions of P.D. 1508
      • requirement NOT complied with
        • case shall be dismissed without prejudice
    • it may be revived only when such requirement has been complied with
    • provision does not apply in criminal cases where accused was arrested without a warrant
  2. Prohibited Pleadings and Motions (Section 19)
    • motion to dismiss the complaint/quash complaint or information
      • except: lack of jurisdiction on subject matter
      • failure to comply with P.D. 1508 (cases requiring referral to Lupon but not complied with
    • motion for a bill of particulars
    • motion for new trial/reconsideration of a judgment/reopening of trial
    • petition for relief from judgment
    • motion for extension of time to file pleadings, affidavits or other paper
    • memoranda
    • petition for certiorari, mandamus, or prohibition against any interlocutory order issued by court
    • motion to declare defendant in default
    • dilatory motions for postponement
    • reply
    • thrid party complaints
    • interventions
  3. Affidavits (Section 20)
    • under this rule, the affidavits required to be submitted shall state only facts of:
      • direct personal knowledge of the affiant which are admissible in evidence
      • shall show their competence to testify on matters stated
    • violation of this requirement (direct personal knowledge&competence to testify)
      • may subject a party or counsel who submits the same to disciplinary action
      • shall be the cause to expunge the inadmissible affidavit or portion thereof from the record
  4. Appeal (Section 21) 
    • judgment/final order
      • appealable to appropriate RTC which shall decide the same in accordance with Sec 22 of BP 129 

        • Sec. 22 of BP 129: Appellate jurisdiction. – Regional Trial Courts shall exercise appellate jurisdiction over all cases decided by Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts, and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts in their respective territorial jurisdictions. Such cases shall be decided on the basis of the entire record of the proceedings had in the court of origin and such memoranda and/or briefs as may be submitted by the parties or required by the Regional Trial Courts. The decision of the Regional Trial Courts in such cases shall be appealable by petition for review to the Court of Appeals which may give it due course only when the petition shows prima facie that the lower court has committed an error of fact or law that will warrant a reversal or modification of the decision or judgment sought to be reviewed.
      • decision of RTC in civil case governed in this rule
        • including forcible entry and unlawful detainer
          • immediately executory without prejudice to further appeal that may be taken therefrom

5.  Applicability of the Regular Rules (Section 22)

        • regular procedure >> prescribed in Rules of Court >> apply to special cases >> provided for in suppletory capacity insofar as they are not inconsistent herewith

 6. Effectivity (Section 23)

        • November 15, 1991 

Popular posts from this blog

Heirs of Roxas v. IAC (G.R. No. 67195, May 29, 1989)

 Facts: Heirs of Eugenia V. Roxas (HEVR) seeks to nullify MJBFS' license to operate the restaurant in the Hidden Valley Springs Resort and to prohibit the DOT from issuing any other license to respondent Guillermo Roxas. The function of the writ of prohibition is to prevent the doing of some act that is about to be done. It is not intended to provide a remedy for acts already accomplished.  Public respondents argued that no grave abuse of discretion was committed by them because under the "Rules and Regulations Governing the Business and Operation of all Restaurants in the Philippines", MJBFS was not required to submit a contract of lease or written permit from the petitioner, the restaurant owner, allowing the former to operate the latter's restaurant. Moreover, they contend that the issuance of the license in favor of MJBFS was predicated on the favorable recommendation of a DOT Team of Inspectors that evaluated MJBFS’ application and inspected the premises of the s...
Read more

Farrales v. Camarista (A.M. No. MTJ-99-1184, March 02, 2000)

Petitioners:  AMPARO S. FARRALES AND ATTY. RAUL S. SISON Respondent:  JUDGE RUBY B. CAMARISTA Topic: Revised Rule on Summary Proceedings (Section 10 and 8); Erroneous Application of P.D. 1508 Doctrine:  It is thus very clear that the period for a rendition of judgment in cases falling under the summary procedure is thirty days. This is in keeping with the spirit of the rule which aims to achieve an expeditious and inexpensive determination of the cases falling thereunder. Recit-ready: There were two civil cases which were remained unsolved because the respondent Judge referred them to the barangay for conciliation instead of actually deciding on the case. The complainants contend that the respondent Judge lacks knowledge on the Revised Rule on Summary Procedure and questioned the acts of the judge on referring the case to the barangay level when the parties live in barangays of different cities or municipalities. The respondent Judge averred that she referred the cases t...
Read more