3. INSTRUCTIVO DE USO DE LA HERRAMIENTA
3.2. Uso del aplicativo
Q: What are the possessory actions on real property? A: Accion Interdictal Accion Publiciana Accion Reinvindicatoria Summary
action for the recovery of
physical possession
where the disposses-sion has not lasted for more than
1 year.
A plenary action for the recovery of the real right of possession
when the dispossession has lasted for more than 1
year.
An action for the recovery of ownership, which necessarily includes the recovery of possession. All cases of forcible entry and unlawful detainer irrespective of the amount of damages or unpaid rentals sought to be recovered should be brought to the MTC. RTC has jurisdiction if the value of the
property exceeds P20,000 or P50,000 in Metro Manila. MTC has jurisdiction if the value of the
property does not exceed the above amounts. RTC has jurisdiction if the value of the property exceeds P20,000 or P50,000 in Metro Manila. MTC has jurisdiction if the value of the property does not exceed the above amounts.
Note: Forcible entry and unlawful detainer actions are
summary in nature designed to provide for an expeditious means of protecting actual possession or the right to possession of the property involved
(Sudaria v..Quiambao, GR No. 164305, November 20, 2007)
157
ACADEMICS CHAIR:LESTER JAY ALAN E.FLORES II
U
N I V E R S I T Y O FS
A N T OT
O M A SQ: What rule should govern the proceedings of
accion interdictal?
A:
GR: Ejectment cases are summary proceedings intended to provide an expeditious means of protecting actual possession or right to possession of property.
XPN: When the decision of the MTC is appealed to the RTC, the applicable rules are those of the latter court (Refugia v. CA, G.R. No. 118284, July 5, 1996).
c. JURISDICTION IN ACCION PUBLICIANA AND ACCION REINVINDICATORIA
Q: In which court accion publiciana and accion
reinvindicatoria filed?
A: The actions of forcible entry and unlawful detainer are within the exclusive and original jurisdiction of the MTC, MeTC and MCTC (Sec. 33[2], BP 129; RA 7691) and shall be governed by the rules on summary procedure irrespective of the amount of damages or rental sought to be recovered (Sec. 3, Rule 70).
d. WHO MAY INSTITUTE THE ACTION AND WHEN; AGAINST WHOM THE ACTION MAY BE
MAINTAINED
Q: Who may institute the action?
A: Subject to the provisions of the next succeeding section, a person deprived of the possession of any land or building by force, intimidation, threat, strategy, or stealth, or a lessor, vendor, vendee, or other person against whom the possession of any land or building is unlawfully withheld after the expiration or termination of the right to hold possession, by virtue of any contract, express or implied, or the legal representatives or assigns of any such lessor, vendor, vendee, or other person, may, at any time within one (1) year after such unlawful deprivation or withholding of possession, bring an action in the proper Municipal Trial Court against the person or persons unlawfully withholding or depriving of possession, or any person or persons claiming under them, for the restitution of such possession, together with damages and costs (Sec. 1, Rule 70).
e. PLEADINGS ALLOWED
Q: What are the pleadings allowed?
A: The only pleadings allowed to be filed are the complaint, compulsory counterclaim and cross- claim pleaded in the answer, and the answers thereto. All pleadings shall be verified (Sec. 4, Rule 70).
f. ACTION ON THE COMPLAINT
Q: What action will the court make upon receipt of the complaint?
A: The court may, from an examination of the allegations in the complaint and such evidence as may be attached thereto, dismiss the case outright on any of the grounds for the dismissal of a civil action which are apparent therein. If no ground for dismissal is found, it shall forthwith issue summons (Sec. 5, Rule 70).
g. WHEN DEMAND IS NECESSARY
Q: When is demand necessary?
A: Unless there exists a stipulation to the contrary, an unlawful detainer case shall be commenced only after the demand to pay or comply with the conditions of the lease and to vacate is made upon the lessee (Sec. 2). The requirement for a demand implies that the mere failure of the occupant to pay rentals or his failure to comply with the conditions of the lease does not ipso facto render his possession of the premises unlawful. It is the failure to comply with the demand that vests upon the lessor a cause of action.
Q: In what form should the demand be made? A: The demand may be in the form of a written notice served upon the person found in the premises. The demand may also be made by posting a written notice on the premises if no person can be found thereon (Sec. 2). It has been ruled, however, that the demand upon a tenant may be oral (Jakihaca vs. Aquino, 181 SCRA 67). Sufficient evidence must be adduced to show that there was indeed a demand like testimonies from disinterested and unbiased witnesses.
h. PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION AND PRELIMINARY MANDATORY INJUNCTION
Q: Can the court grant injunction while the case is pending?
A: The court may grant preliminary injunction, in accordance with the provisions of Rule 58, to
prevent the defendant from committing further acts of dispossession against the plaintiff. A possessor deprived of his possession through forcible entry or unlawful detainer may, within five (5) days from the filing of the complaint, present a motion in the action for forcible entry or unlawful detainer for the issuance of a writ of preliminary mandatory injunction to restore him in his possession. The court shall decide the motion within thirty (30) days from the filing thereof (Sec. 15, Rule 70).
i. RESOLVING DEFENSE OF OWNERSHIP
Q: In what instances may the court resolve issue of ownership?
A: When the defendant raises the issue of ownership, the court may resolve the issue of ownership only under the following conditions: (a) When the issue of possession cannot be resolved without resolving the issue of ownership; and
(b) The issue of ownership shall be resolved only to determine the issue of possession (Sec. 16). Note: The assertion by the defendant of ownership
over the disputed property does not serve to divest the inferior court of its jurisdiction. The defendant cannot deprive the court of jurisdiction by merely claiming ownership of the property involved (Rural
Bank of Sta. Ignacia vs. Dimatulac, 401 SCRA 742; Perez vs. Cruz, 404 SCRA 487).If the defendant raises
the question of ownership and the issue of possession cannot be resolved without deciding the question of ownership, the issue of ownership shall be resolved only to determine the issue of possession (Sec. 3, RA
7691).
j. HOW TO STAY THE IMMEDIATE EXECUTION OF JUDGMENT
Q: How is the execution of judgment stayed? A: Defendant must take the following steps to stay the execution of the judgment:
1. Perfect an appeal;
2. File a supersedeas bond to pay for the rents, damages and costs accruing down to the time of the judgment appealed from; and
3. Deposit periodically with the RTC, during the pendency of the appeal, the adjudged amount of rent due under the contract or if there be no contract, the reasonable value of the use and occupation of the premises (Sec. 19, Rule 70).
k. SUMMARY PROCEDURE; PROHIBITED PLEADINGS
Q: What is the nature of an action for forcible entry and unlawful detainer?
A: Forcible entry and unlawful detainer actions are summary in nature designed to provide for an expeditious means of protecting actual possession or the right to possession of the property involved (Tubiano vs. Riazo, 335 SCRA 531). These action shall both fall under the coverage of the Rules of Summary Procedure irrespective of the amount of damages or unpaid rental sought to be recovered (Sec. 3, Rule 70).
Q: What are the prohibited pleadings and motion under Rule 70?
A: Prohibited pleadings and motions:
1. Motion to dismiss the complaint except on the ground of lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter, or failure to comply with section 12;
2. Motion for a bill of particulars;
3. Motion for new trial, or for reconsideration of a judgment, or for reopening of trial;
4. Petition for relief from judgment; 5. Motion for extension of time to file
pleadings, affidavits or any other paper; 6. Memoranda;
7. Petition for certiorari, mandamus, or prohibition against any interlocutory order issued by the court;
8. Motion to declare the defendant in default;
9. Dilatory motions for postponement; 10. Reply;
11. Third-party complaints; 12. Interventions
13. CONTEMPT
Q: What is contempt?
A: It is a defiance of the authority, justice or dignity of the court; such conduct as tends to bring the authority and administration of the law into disrespect or to interfere with, or prejudice litigant or their witnesses during litigation (Halili v. CIR, G.R. No. L-24864, Nov. 19, 1985)
Note: It is commenced by a verified petition with
supporting particulars and certified true copies of documents or papers involved therein (Sec. 4).
159
ACADEMICS CHAIR:LESTER JAY ALAN E.FLORES II
U
N I V E R S I T Y O FS
A N T OT
O M A Sa. KINDS OF CONTEMPT
Q: What are the kinds of contempt? A:
1. Direct or indirect, according to the manner of commission.
2. Civil or Criminal, depending on the nature and effect of the contemptuous act. Q: Distinguish direct from indirect contempt? A:
Direct Contempt Indirect Contempt Committed in the presence
of or so near a court.
Not committed in the presence of the court. Summary in nature Punished after being charged and heard
If committed against: 1. RTC – fine not exceeding P2,000 or imprisonment not exceeding 10 days or both. 2. MTC – fine not exceeding P200 or imprisonment not exceeding 1 day, or both. IF COMMITTED AGAINST: 1. RTC – FINE NOT EXCEEDING P30,000 OR IMPRISONMENT NOT EXCEEDING 6 MONTHS OR BOTH 2. MTC – fine not exceeding P5,000 or imprisonment not exceeding 1 month or both Remedy:Certiorari or prohibition
Remedy: Appeal (by
notice of appeal) Contempt in facie curiae Constructive contempt
Q: What are the grounds of contempt? A:
1. Direct contempt
a. Misbehavior in the presence of or so near a court as to obstruct or interrupt the proceedings
b. Disrespect towards the court c. Offensive personalities toward
others; or
d. Refusal to be sworn or to answer as a witness, or to subscribe an affidavit or deposition when lawfully required to do so (Sec. 1)
2. Indirect contempt
a. Misbehavior of an officer of a court in the performance of his official duties or in his official transactions; b. Abuse or any unlawful interference
with the proceedings not constituting direct contempt. c. Disobedience of or resistance to a
lawful writ, process, order, or judgment of a court or unauthorized intrusion to any real property after being ejected.
d. Failure to obey a subpoena duly served.
e. Assuming to be an attorney or an officer of the court without authority.
f. Rescue or attempted rescue, of a person or property in the custody of an officer.
g. Any improper conduct tending to degrade the administration of justice (Sec. 3)
Q: Distinguish criminal contempt from civil contempt.
A:
Criminal Contempt Civil Contempt Punitive in nature Remedial in nature
Purpose is to preserve the court’s
authority and to punish disobedience
of its orders
Purpose is to provide a remedy for an injured suitor
and to coerce compliance with an order for the preservation of the rights of
private persons Intent is necessary Intent is not necessary
State is the real prosecutor
Instituted by the aggrieved party or his successor or someone who has pecuniary
interest in the right to be protected Proof required is
proof beyond reasonable doubt.
Proof required is more than mere preponderance of
evidence If accused is
acquitted, there can be no appeal.
If judgment is for respondent, there can be an
appeal
Q: Lawyer Mendoza, counsel for the accused in a criminal case, was cited for direct contempt by Judge Tagle and was sentenced to 10 days imprisonment. Lawyer Mendoza was placed in prison immediately. Lawyer Mendoza manifested his readiness to post a bond and to appeal the order by certiorari to stay its execution but Judge Tagle said that the order is immediately executory. Is Judge Tagle correct?
A: No. An order of direct contempt is not immediately executory or enforceable. The contemner must be afforded a reasonable remedy to extricate or purge himself of the contempt. Under Sec. 2, Rule 71, of the Rules of Court, a person adjudged in direct contempt by any court
may not appeal therefrom, but may avail himself of the remedies of certiorari or prohibition. The execution of the judgment shall be suspended pending resolution of such petition, provided such person files a bond fixed by the court which rendered the judgment and conditioned that he will abide by and perform the judgment should the petition be decided against him (Tiongco v. Judge Salao, A.M. No. RTJ-06-2009, July 27, 2006).
b. PURPOSE AND NATURE OF EACH
Q: What is the purpose of the power to contempt? A: The reason for the power to punish for contempt is that respect of the courts guarantees the stability of their institution. Without such guarantee, said institution would be resting on shaky foundation (Cornejovs.Tan, 85 Phil. 772).
Q: What is the nature of contempt power? A: The power to punish for contempt is inherent in all courts; its existence is essential to the preservation of order in judicial proceedings and to the enforcement of judgments, orders and mandates of the courts, and, consequently, to the due administration of justice.
Q: What are the dual aspects on the power to punish contempt?
A:
1. Primarily, the proper punishment of the guilty party for his disrespect to the courts; and
2. Secondarily, his compulsory performance of some act or duty required of him by the court and which he refuses to perform. c. REMEDY AGAINST DIRECT CONTEMPT; PENALTY
Q: What is theremedy against direct contempt and its penalty?
A:
1. The penalty for direct contempt depends upon the court which the act was committed;
a. If the act constituting direct contempt was committed against an RTC or a court of equivalent or higher rank, the penalty is a fine not exceeding 2,000 pesos or imprisonment not exceeding 10 days, or both;
b. If the act constituting direct contempt was committed against a
lower court, the penalty is a fine not exceeding 200 pesos or imprisonment not exceeding one (1) day, or both (Sec. 1)’;
c. If the contempt consists in the refusal or omission to do an act which is yet within the power of the respondent to perform, he may be imprisoned by order of the court concerned until he performs it. 2. A person adjudged in direct contempt may not
appeal therefrom. His remedy is a petition for certiorari or prohibition directed against the court which adjudged him in direct contempt (Sec. 2). Pending the resolution of the petition for certiorari or prohibition, the execution of the judgment for direct contempt shall be suspended. The suspension however shall take place only if the person adjudged in contempt files a bond fixed by the court which rendered the judgment. This bond is conditioned upon his performance of the judgment should the petition be decided against him.
d. REMEDY AGAINST INDIRECT CONTEMPT; PENALTY
Q: What is theremedy against indirect contempt and its penalty?
A:
1. The punishment for indirect contempt depends upon the level of the court against which the act was committed;
(a) Where the act was committed against an RTC or a court of equivalent or higher rank, he may be punished by a fine not exceeding 30,000 pesos or imprisonment not exceeding 6 months, or both;
(b) Where the act was committed against a lower court, he may be punished by a fine not exceeding 5,000 pesos or imprisonment not exceeding one month, or both. Aside from the applicable penalties, if the contempt consists in the violation of a writ of injunction, TRO or status quo order, he may also be ordered to make complete restitution to the party injured by such violation of the property involved or such amount as may be alleged and proved (Sec. 7);
(c) Where the act was committed against a person or entity exercising quasi-judicial functions, the penalty imposed shall depend upon the provisions of the law which authorizes a penalty for
161
ACADEMICS CHAIR:LESTER JAY ALAN E.FLORES II
U
N I V E R S I T Y O FS
A N T OT
O M A Scontempt against such persons or entities.
(2) The person adjudged in indirect contempt may appeal from the judgment or final order of the court in the same manner as in criminal cases. The appeal will not however have the effect of suspending the judgment if the person adjudged in contempt does not file a bond in an amount fixed by the court from which the appeal is taken. This bond is conditioned upon his performance of the judgment or final order if the appeal is decided against (Sec. 11).
e. HOW CONTEMPT PROCEEDINGS ARE COMMENCED
Q: How may an action for indirect contempt be commenced?
A:
1. By order or other formal charge by the court requiring the respondent to show cause why he should not be punished for contempt (motuproprio); or
2. By a verified petition with supporting particulars and certified true copies of the necessary documents and papers (independent action) (Sec. 4).
Note: The first procedure applies only when the
indirect contempt is committed against a court or judge possessed and clothed with contempt powers. The second mode applies if the contemptuous act was committed not against a court or a judicial officer with authority to punish contemptuous acts. (Nazareno v.
Barnes, G.R. No. L-59072, Apr. 25, 1984)
The court does not declare the respondent in default since the proceeding partakes the nature of a criminal prosecution (Fuentes v. Leviste, G.R. No. L-47363, Oct.
28, 1982).
Q: What are the procedural requisites before the accused may be punished for indirect contempt? A:
1. A charge in writing to be filed;
2. An opportunity for the person charged to appear and explain his conduct; and 3. To be heard by himself or counsel.
(Regalado v. Go, G.R. No. 167988, Feb. 6, 2007)
NOTE: The rules on contempt under Rule 71 apply to
contempt committed against persons or entities exercising quasi-judicial functions or in case there are rules for contempt adopted for such bodies or entities
pursuant to law, Rule 71 shall apply suppletorily (Sec 12, Rule 71)
Quasi-judicial bodies that have the power to cite persons for indirect contempt pursuant to Rule 71 of the Rules of Court can only do so by initiating them in the proper RTC. It is not within their jurisdiction and competence to decide the indirect contempt cases.
Q: May a non-party be held for contempt? A: No, unless he is guilty of conspiracy with any one of the parties in violating the court’s orders (DesaEnt., Inc. v. SEC, G.R. No. L-45430, Sept. 30, 1982).
Q: Ray, through Atty. Velasco, filed a complaint for quieting of title against Chiz. Chiz, however, interposed the defense that the documents relied upon by Ray and Atty. Velasco were forged and falsified. Finding that the said documents were indeed forged and falsified, Judge Victoria cited Ray and Atty. Velasco for direct contempt and ordered them to serve 10 days of detention at the Municipal Jail. Ray and Atty. Velasco filed a motion for bail and a motion to lift the order of arrest. But they were denied outright by Judge Victoria. Is Judge Victoria correct?
A: No. Direct contempt is a contumacious act done
facie curiae and may be punished summarily without hearing. Indirect or constructive contempt, in turn, is one perpetrated outside of the sitting of the court.
Here the use of falsified and forged documents is a contumacious act. However, it constitutes indirect contempt not direct contempt. The imputed use of a falsified document, more so where the falsity of the document is not apparent on its face, merely constitutes indirect contempt, and as such is subject to such defenses as the accused may raise in the proper proceedings. Thus, following Sec. 3,