We’ve covered Motions and Dismissal of Actions in our last post. Let’s now go to the rather long but important rule on Pre-trial.
“The importance of pre-trial in civil actions cannot be overemphasized. In Balatico v. Rodriguez, the Court, citing Tiu v. Middleton, delved on the significance of pre-trial, thus:
Pre-trial is an answer to the clarion call for the speedy disposition of cases. Although it was discretionary under the 1940 Rules of Court, it was made mandatory under the 1964 Rules and the subsequent amendments in 1997. [It is] hailed as ‘the most important procedural innovation in Anglo-Saxon justice in the nineteenth century.'”
–The Philippine American Life & General Insurance Company v. Enario, citing Balatico v. Rodriguez, cited in Chingkoe v. Republic, 2013
RULE 18- PRE-TRIAL
The whole Rule 18 is now more practical in terms of its application, as opposed to the 1997 version where it was more theoretical.
We have a flowchart on pre-trial here to guide us a bit:
Here’s the imgur link so that desktop users can zoom in.
Let’s start.
Section 1. When conducted. — After the last responsive pleading has been served and filed, the branch clerk of court shall issue, within five (5) calendar days from filing, a notice of pre-trial which shall be set not later than sixty (60) calendar days from the filing of the last responsive pleading.
This Section has substantive amendments. Unlike before where it is the plaintiff’s duty to set the case for pre-trial, the DUTY IS NOW ON THE Clerk of Court to issue a notice of pre-trial within 5 days from the filing and service of the last responsive pleading. There is also an additional requirement that the pre-trial should be set not later than 60 days from the filing of the last responsive pleading.
As to the first phrase, “After the last responsive pleading has been served and filed,” it refers to either an answer, reply, or rejoinder.
If there is no actionable document attached to the Answer, then such Answer would be the “last responsive pleading.” Why? Because a Reply, normally the responsive pleading for an Answer, is ONLY ALLOWED IF THERE IS AN ACTIONABLE DOCUMENT as stated in Rule 6, Sec. 2:
Section 2. Pleadings allowed. — The claims of a party are asserted in a complaint, counterclaim, cross-claim, third (fourth, etc.)-party complaint, or complaint-in-intervention.
The defenses of a party are alleged in the answer to the pleading asserting a claim against him or her.
An answer may be responded to by a reply only if the defending party attaches an actionable document to the answer.
-Rule 6
KINDS OF PLEADINGS
And again, if in the Reply, there is an actionable document, then THE LAST POSSIBLE RESPONSIVE PLEADING would be the Rejoinder as stated in Rule 6, Sec. 10:
Section 10. Reply. — All new matters alleged in the answer are deemed controverted. If the plaintiff wishes to interpose any claims arising out of the new matters so alleged, such claims shall be set forth in an amended or supplemental complaint. However, the plaintiff may file a reply only if the defending party attaches an actionable document to his or her answer.
A reply is a pleading, the office or function of which is to deny, or allege facts in denial or avoidance of new matters alleged in, or relating to, said actionable document.
In the event of an actionable document attached to the reply, the defendant may file a rejoinder if the same is based solely on an actionable document.
-Rule 6
KINDS OF PLEADINGS
What does this imply? It means that:
1. If the Answer has no actionable document attached, the Clerk of Court should issue a notice of pre-trial within 5 days from the filing of such Answer.
2. If the Answer has an actionable document attached, the notice of pre-trial should not yet be issued because its possible that there may be a Reply and such Reply is the last responsive pleading.
3. If the Reply also has an actionable document attached, then it’s possible that the Rejoinder would be the last responsive pleading. If there is no actionable document attached, then the Reply will be the last responsive pleading, and the Clerk of Court should issue a notice of pre-trial within 5 days.
What happens if there is no notice of pre-trial?
It renders the pre-trial and subsequent proceedings VOID!
On what grounds? For violation of the constitutional right to DUE PROCESS.
“In Pineda v. Court of Appeals, the Court therein discussed the importance of the notice of pre-trial. It pointed out that the absence of the notice of pre-trial constitutes a violation of a person’s constitutional right to due process. Further, the Court ruled that all subsequent orders, including the default judgment, are null and void and without effect, viz:
Reason and justice ordain that the court a quo should have notified the parties in the case at bar. Otherwise, said parties without such notice would not know when to proceed or resume proceedings. With due notice of the proceedings, the fate of a party adversely affected would not be adjudged ex parte and without due process, and he would have the opportunity of confronting the opposing party, and the paramount public interest which calls for a proper examination of the issues in any justiciable case would be subserved. The absence, therefore, of the requisite notice of pre-trial to private respondents through no fault or negligence on their part, nullifies the order of default issued by the petitioner Judge for denying them their day in court — a constitutional right. In such, the order suffers from an inherent procedural defect and is null and void. Under such circumstance, the granting of relief to private respondents becomes a matter of right; and the court proceedings starting from the order of default to the default judgment itself should be considered null and void and of no effect.”
–PNB v. Perez, 2011, citing Pineda v. CA
And, as we already learned before, denial of due process is equivalent to lack of jurisdiction which may be a ground for a Petition for Annulment of Judgment under Rule 47:
“In cases involving jurisdiction over the subject matter, the Court has consistently recognized the denial of due process as a valid ground to file a petition for annulment of judgment. This is because, as rationalized in the case of De Pedro v. Romasan Development Corporation (De Pedro), the violation of one’s due process rights is, after all, a defect in jurisdiction:
Due process requires that those with interest to the thing in litigation be notified and given an opportunity to defend those interests. Courts, as guardians of constitutional rights, cannot be expected to deny persons their due process rights while at the same time be considered as acting within their jurisdiction.
Violation of due process rights is a jurisdictional defect. This court recognized this principle in Aducayen v. Flores [151-A Phil. 556 (1973)].”
–Arrieta v. Arrieta, 2018
Section 2. Nature and purpose. – The pre-trial is mandatory and should be terminated promptly. The court shall consider:
(a) The possibility of an amicable settlement or of a submission to alternative modes of dispute resolution;
(b) The simplification of the issues;
(c) The possibility of obtaining stipulations or admissions of facts and of documents to avoid unnecessary proof;
(d) The limitation of the number and identification of witnesses and the setting of trial dates;
(e) The advisability of a preliminary reference of issues to a commissioner;
(f) The propriety of rendering judgment on the pleadings, or summary judgment, or of dismissing the action should a valid ground therefor be found to exist;
(g) The requirement for the parties to:
1. Mark their respective evidence if not yet marked in the judicial affidavits of their witnesses;
2. Examine and make comparisons of the adverse parties’ evidence vis-a-vis the copies to be marked;
3. Manifest for the record stipulations regarding the faithfulness of the reproductions and the genuineness and due execution of the adverse parties’ evidence;
4. Reserve evidence not available at the pre-trial, but only in the following manner:
i. For testimonial evidence, by giving the name or position and the nature of the testimony of the proposed witness;
ii. For documentary evidence and other object evidence, by giving a particular description of the evidence.
No reservation shall be allowed if not made in the manner described above.
(h) Such other matters as may aid in the prompt disposition of the
action.
The failure without just cause of a party and counsel to appear during pre-trial, despite notice, shall result in a waiver of any objections to the faithfulness of the reproductions marked, or their genuineness and due execution.
The failure without just cause of a party and/or counsel to bring the evidence required shall be deemed a waiver of the presentation of such evidence.
The branch clerk of court shall prepare the minutes of the pre-trial, which shall have the following format: (See prescribed form)
Section 2 is pretty long. It enumerates the nature and purpose of the pre-trial.
Just to give a bird’s eye view of pre-trial, it’s definitely the best mechanism invented to obtain an orderly and speedy trial. Not only that, it explores all avenues possible that may even end the proceedings prior to trial via mediation, judicial dispute resolution, judgment on the pleadings, or summary judgment.
“The importance of pre-trial in civil cases cannot be overemphasized. Time and again, this Court has recognized ‘the importance of pre-trial procedure as a means of facilitating the disposal of cases by simplifying or limiting the issues and avoiding unnecessary proof of facts at the trial, and x x x to do whatever may reasonably be necessary to facilitate and shorten the formal trial.’ The need for strict adherence to the rules on pre-trial thus proceeds from its significant role in the litigation process.”
–Chua v. Sps. Cheng, 2017
Thus, while the Pre-Trial is mandatory, the amendments on Rule 18 Pre-Trial are sort of stricter and more streamlined now. There is even an addition of “and should be terminated promptly.”
I’d like to think of Pre-Trial as when two nations are at the brink of war, but before they both unleash unbridled fury upon one another, their heads of state decide to hold a meeting. They’ll discuss if they can still agree on a treaty that may be satisfactory for both of them, or if one may just surrender and be made part of the other, or, if war is unavoidable, they’ll discuss the ground rules. For example, no damage to the main cities, no hurting of women and children, no chemical warfare, no poisoning of water supplies. Maybe they’ll even agree that they’ll each choose one of their champions who’ll fight to the death to decide the war.
Pre-Trial is sort of the same. It’s just that it’s conducted before the court and there are serious consequences if the Rules are not followed.
In A Pre-Trial, the following should be considered by the court:
(a) The possibility of an amicable settlement or of a submission to alternative modes of dispute resolution;
These include court-annexed mediation and judicial dispute resolution, among others.
(b) The simplification of the issues;
These refer to both FACTUAL and even LEGAL issues. The Rules do not distinguish.
EXAMPLES:
Factual issues- time of death, time of delivery, whether words were spoken, whether a document was signed
Legal issues- whether prescription set in, whether a party is a builder in good faith, whether the diligence of a good father of the family was exercised
(c) The possibility of obtaining stipulations or admissions of facts and of documents to avoid unnecessary proof;
These admissions will become JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS under Rule 129, Sec. 4 which would not require proof and would be hard to contradict:
Section 4. Judicial admissions. – An admission, oral or written, made by the party in the course of the proceedings in the same case, does not require proof. The admission may be contradicted only by showing that it was made through palpable mistake or that the imputed admission was not, in fact, made.
“The stipulations are perpetuated in a pre-trial order which legally binds the parties to honor the same.”
–Abubakar v. Abubakar, 1999
(d) The limitation of the number and identification of witnesses and the setting of trial dates;
This is in line with the objectives of the “one-day examination” rule and the “most important witness” rule.
The Most Important Witness Rule:
In civil cases where no amicable settlement was reached by the parties, the trial judge shall determine the most important witnesses and limit the number of such witnesses to be heard.
-A.M. No. 03-1-09-SC, 2004 Guidelines of Pre-trial and Use of Deposition-Discovery Measures
One-Day Examination Rule:
“The One-Day Examination of Witness Rule, that is, a witness has to be fully examined in one (1) day only, shall be strictly adhered to subject to the courts’ discretion during trial on whether or not to extend the direct and/or cross-examination for justifiable reasons.”
-A.M. No. 03-1-09-SC, 2004 Guidelines of Pre-trial and Use of Deposition-Discovery Measures
(e) The advisability of a preliminary reference of issues to a commissioner;
ANY MATTER can be referred to a commissioner IF BOTH PARTIES AGREE. If there is no agreement between the parties, only limited matters may be referred to a commissioner.
(f) The propriety of rendering judgment on the pleadings, or summary judgment, or of dismissing the action should a valid ground therefor be found to exist;
Pre-trial will let the court have a closer look into the claims and defenses of both parties. Thus, it will be easier for the court to determine whether a judgment on the pleadings (Rule 34), a summary judgment (Rule 35), or a dismissal is proper.
(g) The requirement for the parties to:
1. Mark their respective evidence if not yet marked in the judicial affidavits of their witnesses;
2. Examine and make comparisons of the adverse parties’ evidence vis-a-vis the copies to be marked;
3. Manifest for the record stipulations regarding the faithfulness of the reproductions and the genuineness and due execution of the adverse parties’ evidence;
4. Reserve evidence not available at the pre-trial, but only in the following manner:
i. For testimonial evidence, by giving the name or position and the nature of the testimony of the proposed witness;
ii. For documentary evidence and other object evidence, by giving a particular description of the evidence.
No reservation shall be allowed if not made in the manner described above.
These requirements and rules on reservations are very important. Unmarked evidence, evidence not reserved properly, would be worthless in trial.
(h) Such other matters as may aid in the prompt disposition of the action.
As overly emphasized, the PROMPT DISPOSITION of the action is the objective.
We can notice that these enumerations in Section 2 are also reflected in Section 6 (Pre-Trial Brief) and Section 7 (Pre-Trial Order).
Anyway, going back to Section 2, we also have there paragraphs saying:
“The failure without just cause of a party and counsel to appear during pre-trial, despite notice, shall result in a waiver of any objections to the faithfulness of the reproductions marked, or their genuineness and due execution.
The failure without just cause of a party and/or counsel to bring the evidence required shall be deemed a waiver of the presentation of such evidence.”
For a little background. this is the process under A.M. No. 03-1-09-SC (Guidelines of Pre-trial and Use of Deposition-Discovery Measures) and adopted with the new Rules:
1. First Phase- Preliminary Conference (Conducted before the Clerk of Court)
What happens here?
-The CoC assists the parties in reaching a settlement
-The parties MARK their respective evidence
-The parties EXAMINE and MAKE COMPARISONS of the adverse parties’ evidence vis-a-vis the copies to be marked
-The parties MANIFEST FOR THE RECORD stipulations regarding the faithfulness of the reproductions and the genuineness and due execution of the adverse parties’ evidence
-The parties RESERVE EVIDENCE not available at the pre-trial but only in the following manner:
i. For testimonial evidence, by giving the name OR position and the nature of the testimony of the proposed witness;
ii. For documentary evidence and other object evidence, by giving a particular description of the evidence.
No reservation shall be allowed if not made in the manner described above.
So, basically what happens in the Preliminary Conference are the items in Rule 18, Sec. 2(g) + the CoC assists the parties in reaching a settlement.
2. Second Phase- Pre-Trial Proper (Conducted before the presiding Judge)
What happens here? Well, the rest of Rule 18 typically happens here.
For example:
-Adopt the minutes of the preliminary conference as part of the pre-trial proceedings and confirm markings of exhibits and admissions on the genuineness and due execution of documents.
-Define and simplify the factual and legal issues arising from the pleadings. Uncontroverted issues and frivolous claims or defenses should be eliminated.
-Inquire if the pleadings are in order. If not, order the amendments if necessary.
-Consider the adding or dropping of parties.
–Scrutinize every single allegation of the complaint, answer and other pleadings and attachments thereto and the contents of documents and all other evidence identified and pre-marked during pre-trial in determining further admissions of facts and documents.
-Determine the MOST IMPORTANT WITNESS and LIMIT the number of witnesses
-Determine the propriety of rendering a summary judgment dismissing the case based on the disclosures made at the pre-trial or a judgment based on the pleadings, evidence identified and admissions made during pre-trial
This is not all that happens, but you get the picture.
Anyway…
The first paragraph refers to failure to attend the Preliminary Conference,
“The failure without just cause of a party and counsel to appear during pre-trial, despite notice, shall result in a waiver of any objections to the faithfulness of the reproductions marked, or their genuineness and due execution.”
The consequence of which is underlined.
While the second paragraph generally refers to failure to bring the required evidence to the Pre-Trial Proper.
“The failure without just cause of a party and/or counsel to bring the evidence required shall be deemed a waiver of the presentation of such evidence.”
However, these two paragraphs are not the only dire consequences in failure to attend Pre-Trial without just cause.
NOTE: Bar Exam questions are mostly geared towards CONSEQUENCES!
Sections 3, 5, 6, and 7 repeatedly states the consequences of DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE (if the plaintiff AND counsel fails to appear) and PLAINTIFF’S PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE EX PARTE (if the defendant AND counsel fails to appear).
Section. 5. Effect of failure to appear. — When duly notified, the failure of the plaintiff and counsel to appear without valid cause when so required, pursuant to the next preceding Section, shall cause the dismissal of the action. The dismissal shall be with prejudice, unless otherwise ordered by the court. A similar failure on the part of the defendant and counsel shall be cause to allow he plaintiff to present his or her evidence ex-parte within ten (10) calendar days from termination of pre-trial, and the court to render judgment on the basis of the evidence offered.
Section. 3. Notice of Pre-trial. — The notice of pre-trial shall include the dates respectively set for:
(a) Pre-Trial;
(b) Court-Annexed Mediation; and
(c) Judicial Dispute Resolution, if necessary.
The notice of pre-trial shall be served on counsel, or on the party who has no counsel. The counsel served with such notice is charged with the duty of notifying the party represented by him or her.
Non-appearance at any of the foregoing settings shall be deemed non-compliance at the Pre-Trial and shall merit the same sanctions under Section 5 hereof.
Section 6. Pre-trial brief. x x x
x x x
Failure to file the pre-trial brief shall have the same effect as failure to appear at the pre-trial.
Thus, these are the consequences we’ve encountered in Pre-Trial:
1. Failure to attend the Preliminary Conference without just cause: waiver of any objections to the faithfulness of the reproductions marked, or their genuineness and due execution (Rule 18, Sec. 2)
But since the preliminary conference is also part of Pre-Trial, failure to attend here may also warrant the consequences under Rule 18, Sec. 5.
2. Failure to bring evidence without just cause: waiver of the presentation of such evidence in trial later on (Rule 18, Sec. 2)
3. Failure to attend without valid cause the Pre-Trial, Court-Annexed Mediation, or Judicial Dispute Resolution:
-For Plaintiff: Dismissal with prejudice (unless ordered otherwise)
-For Defendant: Plaintiff presents evidence ex parte. In other words, the defendant waives the right to present evidence.
(Rule 18, Sec. 5)
3. Failure to file the Pre-Trial Brief:
-For Plaintiff: Dismissal with prejudice (unless ordered otherwise)
-For Defendant: Plaintiff presents evidence ex parte. In other words, the defendant waives the right to present evidence.
(Rule 18, Sec. 6)
NOTE: No just/valid cause requirement here.
It’s important to note that in Sec. 5, a significant change is the addition of “and counsel.” This means that BOTH plaintiff/defendant AND COUNSEL should be present during pre-trial, court-annexed mediation, or judicial dispute resolution. If only one appears, the consequences of Sec. 5 may set in.
However, the party can authorize someone else to appear for him/her. What about counsel? Can such counsel also authorize someone to appear for him? YES! BUT, THAT SOMEONE HAS TO ALSO BE A LAWYER.
Before we go to the rest of pre-trial, let’s explore the remedies for the consequences we just enumerated.
We already discussed last time the remedies of a dismissal with or without prejudice.
Now what would be the remedy if the Defendant is prevented from presenting evidence as per Rule 18, Sec. 5? Not surprisingly, the remedy is a little similar to that when a defendant is declared in default.
SEGUE: The 1964 Rules of Court (Sec. 2, Rule 20) provided that the defendant who fails to attend the pre-trial may be considered “as in default.”
The remedies of the defendant if the court ordered that the plaintiff present evidence ex parte due to the defendant’s (1) failure to appear during pre-trial or (2) failure to file a pre-trial brief are:
1. Motion for Reconsideration
Grounds: Fraud, Accident, Mistake, Excusable Negligence
Is it needed to show that the defendant has a meritorious defense? No! This is already pre-trial and the defendant already has an answer! The showing of a meritorious defense is already in the answer.
SOURCE (This is only found in jurisprudence):
“The failure of the defendant to file a pre-trial brief shall have the same effect as failure to appear at the pre-trial, i.e., the plaintiff may present his evidence ex parte and the court shall render judgment on the basis thereof. The remedy of the defendant is to file a motion for reconsideration showing that his failure to file a pre-trial brief was due to fraud, accident, mistake or excusable neglect. The motion need not really stress the fact that the defendant has a valid and meritorious defense because his answer which contains his defenses is already on record.”
–Saguid v. CA, 2003
2. Petition for Certiorari under Rule 65
Why? Because the order of the court allowing the Plaintiff to present evidence ex parte is merely an interlocutory order. Thus, appeal is not allowed.
Grounds: Grave abuse of Discretion
Let’s now go to the Pre-Trial Brief.
Section 6. Pre-trial brief. — The parties shall file with the court and serve on the adverse party, in such manner as shall ensure their receipt thereof at least three (3) calendar days before the date of the pre-trial, their respective pre-trial briefs which shall contain, among others:
(a) A concise statement of the case and the reliefs prayed for;
(b) A summary of admitted facts and proposed stipulation of facts;
(c) The main factual and legal issues to be tried or resolved;
(d) The propriety of referral of factual issues to commissioners;
(e) The documents or other object evidence to be marked, stating the purpose thereof;
(f) The names of the witnesses, and the summary of their respective testimonies; and
(g) Brief statement of points of law and citation of authorities.
Failure to file the pre-trial brief shall have the same effect as failure to appear at the pre-trial.
As we said before, the Pre-Trial Brief mostly just mirrors Section 2 (Nature and Purpose). It helps the court conduct an orderly Pre-Trial.
It’s important that the parties must file to the court and serve to the adverse party the Pre-Trial Brief at least 3 days from the date of the Pre-Trial. Otherwise, the consequences under Sec. 5 will take place. When can this Pre-Trial date be seen? At the Notice of Pre-Trial.
But, wait a minute!
What if the pre-trial brief was filed and served through means like ordinary mail, registered mail, or accredited courier on time and that the court received the same later than 3 days before the Pre-Trial? Then the court’s (1) order of dismissal or (2) order to allow Plaintiff to present evidence ex parte must be lifted:
“In this case, petitioner sufficiently explained that the pre-trial brief was sent by registered mail to the trial court and respondent on 8 June 2001. That the trial court and respondent did not receive the pre-trial brief at least three days prior to the pre-trial was already beyond petitioner’s control. Therefore, the trial court had discretion to lift the order of dismissal after giving credence to petitioner’s explanation.”
–Republic v. Oleta, 2007
It may also be fitting to add in here that the Rule 18 may not always be applied strictly and absolutely. It may be relaxed in the interest of justice:
“This is not to say, however, that the rules governing pre-trial should be, at all times, applied in absolute terms. While faithful compliance with these rules is undoubtedly desirable, they may be relaxed in cases where their application would frustrate, rather than facilitate, the ends of justice. The relaxation of these rules, however, is contingent upon a showing of compelling and persuasive reasons to justify the same.”
–Chua v. Cheng, 2017
SEGUE:
Actually, we’ve repeatedly discussed this principle before. The textual basis for which is Rule 1, Sec. 6:
SEC. 6. Construction.— These Rules shall be liberally construed in order to promote their objective of securing a just, speedy and inexpensive disposition of every action and proceeding.
Here is a great excerpt from an SC case:
“Nevertheless, this Court has the power to relax the rules or to except a case from their operation when compelling reasons warrant it, or when the purpose of justice requires it, and what constitutes as good and sufficient cause that will merit suspension of the rules is discretionary upon this Court. In fact, the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure explicitly provides that “These Rules shall be liberally construed in order to promote their objective of securing a just, speedy and inexpensive disposition of every action and proceeding.” Pursuant to this doctrine of liberality and in the exercise of this Court’s equity jurisdiction, it may disregard procedural lapses so that a case may be resolved on its merits based on the evidence presented by the parties.”
–Heirs of Cordero v. Sia, 2013
Things to look out for:
1. Compelling reason warrants the relaxation of the rules
2. Purpose of justice requires it
3. Sec. 6 Rule – in order to promote the objective of securing a just, speedy, and inexpensive disposition of every action and proceeding
Section 7. Pre-Trial Order. — Upon termination of pre-trial, the court shall issue an order within ten (10) calendar days which shall recite in detail the matters taken up. The order shall include:
(a) An enumeration of the admitted facts;
(b) The minutes of the pre-trial conference;
(c) The legal and factual issue/s to be tried;
(d) The applicable law, rules, and jurisprudence;
(e) The evidence marked;
(f) The specific trial dates for continuous trial, which shall be within the period provided by the Rules;
(g) The case flowchart to be determined by the court, which shall contain the different stages of the proceedings up to the promulgation of the decision and the use of time frames for each stage in setting the trial dates;
(h) A statement that the one-day examination of witness rule and most important witness rule under A.M. No. 03-1-09-SC (Guidelines for Pre-Trial) shall be strictly followed; and
(i) A statement that the court shall render judgment on the pleadings or summary judgment, as the case may be.
The direct testimony of witnesses for the plaintiff shall be in the form of judicial affidavits. After the identification of such affidavits, cross-examination shall proceed immediately.
Postponement of presentation of the parties’ witnesses at a scheduled date is prohibited, except if it is based on acts of God, force majeure or duly substantiated physical inability of the witness to appear and testify. The party who caused the postponement is warned that the presentation of its evidence must still be terminated within the remaining dates previously agreed upon.
Should the opposing party fail to appear without valid cause stated in the next preceding paragraph, the presentation of the scheduled witness will proceed with the absent party being deemed to have waived the right to interpose objection and conduct cross-examination.
The contents of the pre-trial order shall control the subsequent proceedings, unless modified before trial to prevent manifest injustice.
Because Sec. 7 (Pre-Trial Order) is so long, here are the salient points:
1. The PTO is the “bible” of the trial and shall “control the subsequent proceedings, unless modified before trial to prevent manifest injustice.” It binds the parties and limits the trial to matters not disposed of.
2. Such PTO must be issued by the court within 10 days from termination of pre-trial
3. However, nothing stops the court from :
“However, the Court may opt to dictate the Pre-Trial Order in open court in,the presence of the parties and their counsel and with the use of a computer, shall have the same immediately finalized and printed. Once finished, the parties and/or their counsel shall sign the same to manifest their conformity thereto.”
– A.M. No. 03-1-09-SC (Guidelines of Pre-trial and Use of Deposition-Discovery Measures)
4. These are the only valid grounds for a Motion for Postponement:
1. Acts of God
2. Force Majeure
3. Physical Inability of the witness to appear and testify
5. However, there is still a consequence if ever the Motion for Postponement is granted: the moving party’s presentation of its evidence must still be terminated on the dates previously agreed upon. What does this mean? It means that if, for example, the moving party set 7 days to present evidence, and if the first day was the subject of the Motion for Postponement, the party will only have 6 remaining days to present evidence. In other words, the moving party will not be given a “special day” to make up for the days missed due to the Motion for Postponement. Such party will have to make adjustments to present evidence faster.
6. If the party fails to present the witness without valid grounds, the presentation of such witness shall be waived.
7. If the adverse party is absent during a scheduled presentation of a party’s witness, the adverse party’s right to cross-examine and impose objection shall be waived.
Let’s say that the Pre-Trial proper has just ended, what should the judge do?
It actually has three options:
1. Refer the parties to Court-Annexed Mediation (CAM) [30 days non-extendible]
If CAM is unsuccessful, but the court is convinced that settlement is still possible, refer the case to Judicial Dispute Resolution (JDR) [15 days non-extendible]
2. Issue an order (incorporated in the PTO) that the court will render a Judgment on the Pleadings
3. Issue an order (incorporated in the PTO) that the court will render Summary Judgment
Let’s start with option 1.
Section 8. Court-Annexed Mediation. — After pre-trial and, after issues are joined, the court shall refer the parties for mandatory court-annexed mediation.
The period for court-annexed mediation shall not exceed thirty (30) calendar days without further extension.
Under the previous rules, the CAM was conducted BEFORE the Preliminary Conference and Pre-Trial Proper. The new rules changed that. Why? To make it easier on the mediator! It’s easier because he/she now knows the issues, strengths, and weaknesses on each side. He/she can assess the situation better and offer a more practical solution for both sides.
Anyway, for purposes of the bar, let’s take note that the CAM SHALL NOT EXCEED 30 DAYS. No extension allowed!
Section 9. Judicial Dispute Resolution. — Only if the judge of the court to which the case was originally raffled is convinced that settlement is still possible, the case may be referred to another court for judicial dispute resolution. The judicial dispute resolution shall be conducted within a non-extendible period of fifteen (15) calendar days from notice of failure of the court-annexed mediation.
If judicial dispute resolution fails, trial before the original court shall proceed on the dates agreed upon.
All proceedings during the court-annexed mediation and the judicial dispute resolution shall be confidential.
If the CAM is unsuccessful, but the court is convinced that settlement is still possible, refer the case to Judicial Dispute Resolution.
Who conducts the JDR? It should be another court and not the one that conducted the Pre-Trial.
How long should JDR last? 15 days non-extendible.
Just like in the CAM, all proceedings in the JDR shall be confidential.
The JDR is the last stop before trial. If JDR still fails, trial must go on.
Let’s now go to options 2 and 3.
Section. 10. Judgment after pre-trial. — Should there be no more controverted facts, or no more genuine issue as to any material fact, or an absence of any issue, or should the answer fail to tender an issue, the court shall, without prejudice to a party moving for judgment on the pleadings under Rule 34 or summary judgment under Rule 35, motu proprio include in the pre-trial order that the case be submitted for summary judgment or judgment on the pleadings, without need of position papers or memoranda. In such cases, judgment shall be rendered within ninety (90) calendar days from termination of the pre-trial.
The order of the court to submit the case for judgment pursuant to this Rule shall not be the subject to appeal or certiorari.
Before we begin, are options 1, 2, and 3 mutually exclusive? Yes!
Imagine this, if the court decides to rule via Judgement on the Pleadings (Rule 34) or Summary Judgment (Rule 35), why would it refer the case for mediation? Judgment on the Pleadings or Summary Judgment already DISPOSES OF THE CASE! Mediation will not serve its purpose anymore.
The same with mediation. Why would the court refer the case for mediation when it will just render a judgment? It won’t make sense.
BUT, imagine this, what if the court is convinced that there is no more genuine issue (Summary Judgment is proper) and at the same time, it is also convinced that the case can be settled through CAM? Well, that is why judge’s salaries are so high. They’re given this hard decision to make.
Anyway, just to give a bird’s eye view of Rule 18, Sec. 10:
1. Judgment on the Pleadings (Rule 34) is proper when-
The answer fails to tender an issue or otherwise admits the material allegations of the adverse party’s pleading.
2. Summary Judgment (Rule 35) is proper when-
There must be no genuine issue as to any material fact, except for the amount of damages.
What do we mean by “no genuine issue”? It simply means that there is no more issue that REQUIRES THE PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE:
“A ‘genuine issue of fact’ is an issue which requires the presentation of evidence, as distinguished from a sham, fictitious, contrived or false claim. When the facts as pleaded appear uncontested or undisputed, then there is no real or genuine issue or question as to the facts, and summary judgment is called for. The party who moves for summary judgment has the burden of demonstrating clearly the absence of any genuine issue of fact, or that the issue posed in the complaint is so patently unsubstantial as not to constitute a genuine issue for trial, and any doubt as to the existence of such an issue is resolved against the movant.”
–YKR Corporation v. Philippines Agri-Business Center Corporation, 2014
3. The court shall render the judgment 90 DAYS FROM TERMINATION OF THE PRE-TRIAL
4. The order of the court (equivalent to the statement in letter i of Sec. 7, Pre-Trial Order) shall NOT be subject to appeal or certiorari!
What are the parties’ remedy? Wait for the judgment and appeal that judgment.
For the details Rule 34, we already discussed it in our post here. Rule 35 will probably be discussed later on.
The Bartender 