Civ Pro II Flashcards
Requisites of an Interpleader
- 2 or more claimants with adverse/conflicting interest upon a subject matter
- Conflicting claims involve the same subject matter
- Conflicting claims are made upon the same person
- Plaintiff has no claim/if he has an interest at all, it is not disputed by the
conflicting claimants
WHEN TO FILE AN INTERPLEADER
- Filed within a reasonable time after a dispute has arisen
- Without waiting to be sued by either of the conflicting claimants.
OTHERWISE, it may be barred by laches.
WHAT IS AN ORDER TO IMPLEAD?
Order to implead is issued upon filing the complaint. It requires the parties to
interplead with one another. In the interest of justice, the Court may also direct the
subject matter to be paid or delivered to the court.
Grounds for a motion to dismiss in Interpleader?
A. Impropriety of Interpleader
-it is a special and separate ground
-for an interpleader to be proper, it must comply with the requisites
provided by the Rules
B. 1 Lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter
2. When two or more cases are pending between the same parties over the
same cause of action (Litis Pendencia)
3. Barred by prior judgment (Res Judicata)
4. Barred by statute of limitations (Prescription of offense or action)
MAY THE DEFENDANTS OR DEFENDANTS IN AN INTERPLEADER BE DECLARED IN
DEFAULT?
Yes, if a claimant who has been impleaded fails to file an answer on the date fixed
by the Rules, the court may, on motion, declare him in default and render judgment
barring him from any claim in respect to the subject matter.
NOTE: Declaration of default requires prior motion. It is not mandatory upon the
court.
Requisites for Declaratory Relief:
(a) The subject matter of the controversy must be a deed, will contract or other written instrument,
statute, executive order or regulation, or ordinance;
(b) The terms of said statute or document and the validity thereof are doubtful and require judicial
construction;
(c) There must have been no breach of the statute or document in question;
(d) There must be an actual justiciable controversy or the “ripening seeds” of one between persons
whose interests are adverse;
(e) The issue must be ripe for judicial determination
(f) Adequate relief is not available through other means or other forms of action or proceeding
Who may file the petition for Declaratory relief?
- Any person interested under a deed, will, contract or other written instrument
- Those whose rights are affected
by a statute, executive order or regulation, ordinance, or any other governmental regulation
Actions that may be brought under Declaratory Relief
- Any person interested under a deed, will, contract or other written instrument, or whose rights are affected by a statute, executive order or regulation, ordinance, or any other governmental regulation may, before breach or violation thereof bring an action in the appropriate Regional Trial Court to determine any question of construction or validity arising, and for a declaration of his rights or duties, thereunder.
- An action for the reformation of an instrument, to quiet title to real property or remove clouds therefrom, or to consolidate ownership under Article 1607 of the Civil Code, may be brought under this Rule
Subject Matter of Declaratory Relief (DeWCO-GEOS)
- a deed;
- a will;
- a contract or other written instrument;
- a statute;
- an executive order or regulation;
- an ordinance; or
- any other governmental regulation (Sec. 1, Rule 63, Rules of Court).
Who is the proper petitioner for Declaratory Relief
- Where the subject of the petition is a deed, will contract or other written instrument, the petition is commenced by “any person interested” therein
- Where the subject of the petition is a statute, executive order or regulation, ordinance, or any other governmental regulation, the petition is commenced by one “whose rights are affected” by the same
Who may be impleaded in an petition for Declaratory Relief
- The other parties – all persons who have or claim any interest which would be affected by the declaration
- Where the action involves the VALIDITY of a local government ordinance, the corresponding prosecutor or attorney of the local government unit involved shall be similarly notified and entitled to be heard. If such ordinance is alleged to be UNCONSTITUTIONAL, the Solicitor General shall also be notified and entitled to be heard
- In any action which involves the validity of a statute, executive order or regulation, or any other governmental regulation, the Solicitor General shall be notified by the party assailing the same and shall be entitled to be heard upon such question
Petition for Certiorari
It is an original civil action that is used when any tribunal, board or officer exercising judicial or quasi-judicial function has acted without or in excess of its jurisdiction, or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction. and there is no appeal, nor any plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law.
What is the Scope of Rule 64?
Rule 64 governs the review by the Supreme Court of the Judgements and Final Orders or Resolutions of COMELEC and COA
Time to file the petition for certiorari under rule 64
The petition shall be filed within thirty (30) days from notice of the judgment or final order or resolution sought to be reviewed
If an MR or NT is filed and subsequently denied, the aggrieved party may file the petition within the remaining period, but which shall not be less than five (5) days in any event, reckoned from notice of denial.
64 vs 65
As to whom directed:
64: Directed only to the JUDGEMENTS, FINAL ORDERS or RESOLUTIONS of the COMELEC and COA
65: Directed to any tribunal, board or officers
exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions.
As to filing period:
64: Filed within 30 days from notice of the Judgment.
65:Filed within 60 days from notice of the Judgment
As to Neypes Rule:
64: The filing of a MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION or a MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL, if allowed, interrupts the period for filing of the petition for certiorari. If the motion is DENIED, the aggrieved party may file the petition within the remaining period, but which shall not be less than 5 days reckoned from the notice of denial.
65: The period within which to file the petition if the motion for reconsideration or new trial is denied, is another 60 days from notice of the denial of the motion.
GROUNDS FOR DISMISSAL OF PETITION UNDER RULE 64
- It is insufficient in form and substance;
- It was filed manifestly to delay; or
- The questions raised in it are too unsubstantial to warrant further proceedings.
Effect on the judgment of filing the petition for certiorari under rule 64?
:It shall not stay the execution of the judgment or final order or resolution sought to be reviewed, unless it is directed otherwise upon such terms as it may deem just by the Supreme Court.
What is a petition for certiorari under rule 65?
It is a special civil action directed against a tribunal, board or officer exercising judicial or quasi-judicial functions who have acted without or in excess of jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction praying for the annulment or modification of the proceedings of the lower court.
Why is Certiorari (65) called a prerogative writ?
because it is never demandable as a matter of right. It does not concern itself with errors of judgment, its province is confined to issues of jurisdiction or grave abuse of discretion.
Purpose of Certiorari under Rule 65?
The purpose is to secure a judgment annulling or modifying the proceedings of tribunal, board or officer, and granting such incidental reliefs as law and justice may require.
Requisites for Certiorari under rule 65?
- The petition is directed against a tribunal, board or officer exercising judicial or quasijudicial functions;
- Such tribunal, board or officer has acted without or in excess of jurisdiction or with grave abuse of discretion amounting to lack or excess of jurisdiction;
- There is neither appeal nor any plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of law for the purpose of annulling or modifying the proceeding. And that there must be capricious, arbitrary and whimsical exercise of power for it to prosper; and
- There is an actual case/controversy
Judicial Function
When the tribunal, board or officer has the power to determine what the law is and what the legal rights of the parties are, and then undertakes to determine these questions and adjudicate upon the rights of the parties.
Quasi-Judicial Function
When the action, discretion of a public administrative officers or bodies, which are required to investigate facts or ascertain the existence of facts, hold hearings, and draw conclusions from them as a basis for their official action and to exercise discretion of a judicial nature.
Ministerial Function
A ministerial function is one which an officer or tribunal performs in the context of a given set of facts, in a prescribed manner and without regard to the exercise of his own judgment upon the propriety or impropriety of the act done.
Grave Abuse of Discretion
It means such capricious and whimsical exercise of judgment by the tribunal exercising judicial or quasi judicial functions as to amount of lack of power.
Excess of Jurisdiction
An act, although within the general power of a tribunal, board or officer, is NOT AUTHORIZED NOR VALID because the conditions authorizing it are wanting
45 vs 65
NPIFMPJW
As to Nature:
45: It is mode of appeal, hence, it is a continuation of the appellate process over the original case.
65: It is a special civil action, an original action and independent action, thus it is not part of the appellate process.
As to Purpose:
45: It seeks to review final judgments or final orders.
65: It is usually directed against an interlocutory order or matters where no appeal may be taken. And the purpose is to annul the proceedings of a lower tribunal and prevent an unlawful and oppressive exercise of legal authority.
As to issues raised:
45: It raises only question of law.
65: It raises questions of jurisdiction.
As to filing period:
45: It is filed within 15 days from notice of judgment or final order appealed from.
65: It is filed not later than 60 days from notice of judgment, order, or resolution sought to be assailed, and in case a motion for reconsideration or new trial is timely filed, whether such motion is required or not, the 60 day period is counted from notice of denial of said motion.
As to MR
45: Does not need an MR
65: MR is a condition sine qua non
As to effect on judgment:
45: Stays Judgment
65: Does not stay judgment unless restrained or enjoined
As to Parties
45: Original parties where the appealing party is the petitioner
65: TBO is impleaded as a public respondent with those interested maintaining the judgment
As to where filed:
45: SC
65: RTC, CA, Sandiganbayan and SC
Requisites for Prohibition:
- Respondent inferior court, tribunal, corporation, board, officer, or other person is exercising judicial, quasi-judicial, or ministerial functions;
- Respondent acted without or in excess of jurisdiction, or acted with grave abuse of discretion; and
- There must be no appeal or other plain, speedy, and adequate remedy.
Requisites for Mandamus:
- There must be a clear legal right or duty;
- Respondent must be exercising a ministerial duty — a duty which is absolute and imperative, and involves merely its execution;
- Respondent unlawfully neglects the performance of its duty or unlawfully excludes
another from the use and enjoyment of a right or office to which such other is entitled; and - No appeal or other plain, speedy, and adequate
remedy in the ordinary course of law.
Period for filing a petition for CPM
The petition shall be filed not later than sixty (60) days from notice of the judgment, order or resolution. In case a motion for reconsideration or new trial is timely filed, whether such motion is required or not, the petition shall be filed not later than sixty (60) days counted from the notice of the denial of the motion.
No extension of time to file the petition shall be granted except for compelling reason and in no case exceeding fifteen(15) days. (B.M. No. 803; A.M. No. 00-2-03-SC)
In which court shall a Petition for certiorari, prohibition, and mandamus be filed?
- If the petition relates to the acts or omissions of a lower court, corporation, board, or officer or person: RTC exercising jurisdiction over the territorial area as defined by the SC.
- If the petition relates to the acts or omissions of a quasi-judicial agency: Cognizable only by the CA;
- To the Sandiganbayan or the Court of Appeals, whether or not in aid of the court’s appellate jurisdiction. (Id.)
Doctrine of Heirarchy of Courts
General Rule: The filing of a petition under Rule 65 must follow the hierarchy of courts. Thus, direct resort to the Supreme Court will not be entertained.
Exception: Unless the redress desired cannot be obtained in the appropriate courts or where exceptional and compelling circumstances justify availment of a remedy within and calling for the exercise of the Supreme Court’s primary jurisdiction.
Quo Warranto
a special civil action brought by means of a verified petition in the name of the Republic of the Philippines against:
(a) a person who usurps, intrudes into, or unlawfully holds or exercises a public office, position, or franchise; or
(b) a public officer who does an act or suffers an act which, by provision of la, constitutes a ground for forfeiture of his office; or
(c) an association which acts as a corporation within the Philippines without being legally incorporated or without lawful authority to so act
Who may commence a Quo Warranto proceeding?
GR: As a general rule, Sec. 1, Rule 66, provides that the petition for quo warranto may be brought in the name of the Republic of the Philippines and be commenced by:
1.) Solicitor General (Sec. 2, Rule 66, Rules of Court); or
2.) A Public Prosecutor (Sec. 5, Rule 66, Rules of Court).
However, in certain instances, an individual may commence the petition and may bring the action in his own name provided that:
1.) The person authorized to file the petition for quo warranto is the one who claims to be entitled to a public office or position which was usurped or unlawfully held or exercised by another person (Sec. 5, Rule 66, Rules of Court).
2.) He must show that he has a clear right to challenge and question the title to a public office allegedly being unlawfully held by another. Mere assertion of a right to be appointed to the office is not sufficient regardless of the alleged flaws in the title of the respondent (Cuevas v. Bacal, 347 SCRA 338,355; Cuyegkeng v. Cruz, 108 Phil. 1147,1158).
Why is a Quo Warranto proceeding “brought in the name of the Republic of the Philippines”?
The state is the one granting legal right to hold public office and the right to exercise a public franchise. The unlawful exercise or abuse of such rights is primarily a concern of the Government. Thus, the state is a proper party-plaintiff in a quo warranto petition
Against whom may a Quo Warranto petition may be brought
The petition for usurpation of a public office, position or franchise may be brought against any of the following:
1.) A person who usurps, intrudes into, or unlawfully holds or exercise a public office, position or franchise;
2.) A Public officer, one that does or suffers an act which constitutes a ground for the forfeiture of his office;
3.) An association which acts as a corporation within the Philippines without being legally incorporated or without lawful authority to do so.
When is the commencement of a Quo Warranto proceeding mandatory?
It is mandatory when the petition is commenced by the government through the Solicitor General or a public prosecutor:
a.) When directed by the President of the Philippines;
b.) Upon complaint or otherwise he has a good reason to believe that the case for quo warranto can be established by proof.
When is the commencement of a Quo Warranto proceeding discretionary
It is discretionary when the action is commenced by the Solicitor General or a public prosecutor at the request and upon relation of another person, called the relator
Difference re: filing of the quo warranto petition Sol-Gen v. Private Individual
Private individual – In petitions for quo warranto filed by a private individual, it is necessary for him to prove his right to the office or position in dispute. If he fails to prove his entitlement thereto, it is unnecessary for the court to pass on the right of defendant in office.
Solicitor-General – But when instituted by the Sol-Gen or the public prosecutor, it is not necessary that there be a person claiming to be entitled to the office or position alleged to have been usurped. The duty of the court is to pass upon the right of the defendant to the office. (Acosta vs. Flor, 5 Phil 18, 1905)
Period for filing Quo Warranto
Action must be commenced within 1 year after the cause of such ouster, or the right of
the petitioner to hold such office or position, arose.
● The one-year period, however, is not interrupted by the prosecution of any administrative remedy as, in quo warranto proceedings, no one is compelled to resort to administrative remedies since public interest requires the right to public office should be determined as speedily as possible. (Galano vs. Roxas, L-31241, Sept. 12, 1975)
● The one-year prescriptive period is applicable when the petitioner/s are private individuals asserting their right of office, but it is not applicable when it is the State or the government itself that files the petition for quo warranto (Republic v. Sereno, G.R. No. 237428, May 11, 2018).
The abuse of discretion must be
The abuse of discretion must be patent and gross as to amount to an evasion of a positive duty or a virtual refusal to perform a duty enjoined by law, or to act at all in contemplation of law, as where the power is exercised in an arbitrary and despotic manner by reason of passion and hostility. Lara’s Gift and Decors, Inc. vs. PNB General Insurers Co., Inc., 853 SCRA 220, G.R. Nos. 230429-30 January 24, 2018
Elements of Expropriation
1) The property taken must be private property
2) There must be genuine necessity to take the private property
3) The taking must be for public use
4) There must be payment of just compensation
5) and the taking must comply with due process of law.
Two stages in expropriation:
1st stage: The determination of the authority of the plaintiff to exercise the power to expropriate and the propriety of its exercise in the context of the surrounding facts.
2nd stage: The determination of the just compensation for the property sought to be taken.
In an expropriation proceeding, Suppose the plaintiff would like to take possession of the property IMMEDIATELY, is it possible?
Yes. In real property If he deposits with an authorized government depositary an amount equal to the assessed value of the property for purposes of taxation.
But if the one seeking to expropriate or the plaintiff is a Local Government Unit, then the LGU may take possession if he deposits with the Court an amount equivalent to 15% of the Fair Market Value of the property based on the current tax declaration.
In expropriation, Where to deposit?
Rule 67: With the authorized government depository to be held by such bank subject to the orders of the court.
RA 10752: it shall immediately deposit to the court in favor of the owner.
When is there compensable taking?
- When the private owner is:
1. Deprived of enjoyment of property
2. Destruction of property by the government
3. Government takes possession of the property
The elements of pactum commissorium
- there should be a property mortgaged by way of security for the payment of the principal obligation, and
- there should be a stipulation for automatic appropriation by the creditor of the thing mortgaged in case of non-payment of the principal obligation within the stipulated period
This is expressly prohibited by Art. 2088 CC
Effect of failure to implead indispensable parties in an action for partition
: The Court had consistently ruled that a deed of extrajudicial partition executed to the total exclusion of any of the legal heirs, who had no knowledge of and consent to the execution of the same, is fraudulent, vicious, and a total nullity. As such, it produced no effect whatsoever either against or in favor of anyone.
2 Stages in Partition proceedings
- Determination of the propriety of partition
▪ The first stage involves the determination of whether or not a co-ownership in fact exists and a partition is proper, that is, it is not otherwise legally proscribed and may be made by voluntary agreement of all the parties interested in the property.
- The actual partitioning of the subject property
▪ The Second stage is when the parties are unable to agree upon the partition ordered by the court. In that event, the partition shall be effected for the parties by the court with the assistance of not more than 3 commissioners.
▪ The second stage may also deal with the rendition of the accounting itself and its approval by the Court after the parties have been accorded the opportunity to be heard thereon, and the award for the recovery by the parties entitled of their just shares in the rents and profits of the real estate in question. Such an order is to be sure also final and appealable.
Is an order for partition appealable?
YES, A final order decreeing partition and accounting may be appealed by any party
aggrieved thereby’’
Actions to recover real property
- Accion Interdictal
- Summary action for either UD or FE. This action must be brought within 1 year from either final demand to vacate the property or loss of physical possession - Accion Publiciana
- Plenary action for the right to possess, when the dispossession has lasted for more than 1 year - Accion Reinvidicatoria
-Seeks recovery of ownership
-Plaintiff alleges ownership over real property and seek recovery of its full possession
Forcible Entry
An action to recover possession of a property from a defendant whose occupation thereof IS ILLEGAL FROM THE BEGINNING since he acquired possession thereof through FISTS
Unlawful Detainer
An action for recovery from defendant whose possession of the property was initially lawful by virtue of contract but became unlawful when he continued his possession despite the termination of his right thereunder
Tacita Reconduccion
If, at the end of Contract of Lease, the lessee should continue enjoying the property for 15 days without the consent of the lessor and no notice to the contrary has been given, it is understood that there is an implied lease
ELEMENTS:
1. Term of the original Contract of Lease has expired
2. Lessor has not given notice to lessee to vacate the premises
3. Lessee continued enjoying the thing for 15 days with acquiescence of the lessor
Defense of Tenancy
Where tenancy is raised as a defense, the court must conduct a hearing to determine the veracity of the tenancy
If tenancy is shown to be the real issue, the court shall dismiss the case for want of jurisdiction
Defense of ownership
When the defendant raises the question of ownership and the question of possession cannot be resolved without resolving the question of ownership, the QoO shall be resolved to determine the QoP
Is judgment immediately executory in Ejectment cases? If so, what is the remedy of the defendant
Yes, in order to avoid injustice to the lawful possessor
Defendant must:
1. Perfect an appeal
2. File a supersedeas bond to pay for rents, damages and cost of suit accruing to when judgment was appealed from
3. Deposit periodically with the RTC the amount adjudged due under the Contract OR reasonable value of the use and occupation of the premises
Mandatory requirement in expropriation
Due process ought to be followed. State must show a genuine need to take the private property
