Questions and Answers: Remedial Law Review 1; Causes of Action, Actions and Parties

 REMEDIAL LAW REVIEW 1

B. Causes of Action, Actions and Parties 

1. What is action? What is civil action? What is ordinary civil action? What is special civil action? What is the basis of a cause of action?

1. An Action is the legal and formal demand of one’s right from another person made and insisted upon in a court of justice.

A Civil Action is one by which a party sues another for the enforcement or protection of a right or the prevention or redress of a wrong.

An Ordinary Civil Action is one by which is governed by the ordinary rules.

A Special Civil Action is an action while being governed by ordinary rules is subject to specific rules prescribed under Rule 62 to Rule 71 of the Rules of Court.

The basis of a cause of action is the act or omission by which a party violates the right of another.

2. What are the elements of a cause of action?

1. The elements of a cause of action are as follows: (a) aright in favor of the plaintiff by whatever means and whatever law it arises or is created; (b) an obligation on the part of the named defendant to respect or not to violate such right; and (c) an act or omission on the part of such defendant in violation of such right of the plaintiff for which the latter may maintain an action for recovery of damages or other appropriate relief.

3. What is the difference between lack of cause of action and failure to state a cause of action? Is failure to state a cause of action, a ground for a motion to dismiss? If there is failure to state a cause of action, does it mean that the plaintiff has no cause of action?

1. Lack of cause of action refers to the failure to prove or to establish by evidence one’s stated cause of action while failure to state cause of action refers to an insufficiency in the allegations of the complaint.

Prior amendment, failure to state a cause of action is a ground for a motion to dismiss. It has been held by the Supreme Court that the ground is that the pleading asserting the claim states no cause of action pertains to failure to state cause of action and not to a alack or absence of a cause of action.

No. Failure to state cause of action does not mean that the plaintiff has no cause of action but it merely means that the allegations in the complaint, when taken together, do not completely spell out the elements of a particular cause of action. Otherwise stated, not all the elements of a particular cause of action are alleged.

4. What is the test for determining failure to state a cause of action? How about lack of cause of action?

1. The test in determining failure to state a cause of action is whether a valid judgment could be rendered in accordance with the prayer stated therein or not assuming that the allegations of fact in the complainant to be true.

On the other hand, the test to determine lack of cause of action is whether the evidence sustains the cause of action alleged or not.

5. What is the difference between an action or a cause of action?

1. An action is the suit filed in court for the enforcement or protection of a right or the prevention or redress of a wrong while a cause of action is the basis of the action filed.

6. What is the cause of action? Is splitting the cause of action a ground for a motion to dismiss?

1. Splitting of cause of action is an act of a party instituting more than one suit for a single cause of action. Where the pleader divides a single cause of action, claim or demand into two or more parts and brings a suit for one of such parts with the intent to reserve the rest for another separate action.

Yes. If the act  of splitting cause of action would result in Litis Pendentia or Res Judicata, then the dependant may file a motion to dismiss on such ground/s.

 

7. What are the three (3) tests to ascertain whether the two (2) suits relate to a single or common cause of action?

1. The three (3) test to ascertain whether the two (2) suits relate to a single or common cause of action are as follows: (1) it must be ascertained whether the same evidence which is necessary to sustain the second cause of action would have been sufficient to authorize a recovery in the first [Same Evidence Test]; (2) Whether the defenses in one case may be used to substantiate the complaint in the other; and (3) Whether the cause of action in the second case existed at the time of the filing of the first claim.

8. What is an anticipatory complaint of breach?

1. Even if the contract is divisible in its performance and the future periodic deliveries are not yet due, if the obligor has already manifested his refusal to comply with his future periodic obligations, "the contract is entire and the breach total," hence, there can only be one action for damages. The plaintiff must recover all his damages therein.

9. Can two or more causes of action be joined? If yes, what are the  conditions for the joinder of two causes of action?

1. Yes. A party may in one pleading assert, in the alternative or otherwise, as many causes of actions as he may have against an opposing party subject to the following conditions: (a) the party joining the causes of action shall comply with the rules on joinder of parties; (b) the joinder shall not include special civil actions or actions governed by special rules; (c) where the causes of action are between the same parties but pertain to different venues or jurisdiction, joinder may be allowed in the Regional Trial Court provided one of the causes of action falls within the jurisdiction of the court and the venue lies therein; and (d) where the claims in all causes of action are principally for recovery of money, the aggregate amount claimed shall be the basis of jurisdiction.

 

10. What is the totality rule?

1. The Totality Rule provides that where there are several claims and causes of action between the same or different parties in the same complaint, the amount of demand shall be the totality of the claims in all causes of actions that may arise out of the same or different transactions.

 

11. Who are real parties-in-interest? Who may be parties to civil action?

1. A real parties-in-interest is the party who stands to be benefited and injured by the judgment of the suit or the party entitled to the avails of the suit.

The following may be parties to civil action: (1) natural persons; (2) juridical persons; and (3) entities authorized by law.

 

12. Can an entity which has no legal personality be a party to civil action?

1. Yes. An entity without legal personality can be a party to civil action but only to the extent of being a defendant. Since under the rules it may be sued.

While it cannot be considered a juridical person or an entity authorized by law, which can be a party to a civil action, under the Rule, an entity without juridical personality cannot sue under the name by which it is commonly known, such entity may be sued under certain circumstances.

13. What is the effect if the plaintiff is not a real party-in-interest or the defendant is not a real party-in-interest?
A. The complaint may be dismissed for failure to state cause of action if the defendant is not the real party-in-interest. On the other hand, when the plaintiff is not the real party-in-interest, the complaint may be dismissed on the ground that the plaintiff has no legal capacity to sue.

14. What is the test to determine who the real party-in-interest is?

1. The test to determine who is the real party-in-interest requires going back to the elements of cause of action. Thus, the owner of the rights violated stands to be the real party-in-interest as the plaintiff and the person responsible for the violation is the real party-in-interest as the defendant.

15. What is the difference between locus standi and real party-in-interest? Where is the requirement of locus standi applicable?

1. Locus standi refers to the legal capacity of the party to sue involving public suits such as involving constitutional issues while real party-in-interest refers to the capacity to sue in private litigations.

Locus standing is defined as a right of appearance in court on a given question wherein such party must show that he has sustained a direct injury as a result of that action, and it is not sufficient that he has a general interest common to all members of the public. Whereas the requirement on the real party-in-interest, the interest must be real which is a present substantial interest as distinguished from a mere expectancy or a future, contingent, subordinate interest. Thus, the interest must be material and direct.

16. Who are representative parties?

1. Representative parties are those who are acting in fiduciary capacity on behalf of the real party-in-interest.

17. Can marine mammals become party to a suit?

1. No. Marine mammals cannot become party to a suit. But in one case decided by the Supreme Court, it allowed the petitioners as stewards having shown in their petition that there may be possible violations of laws concerning the habitat of the Resident Marine Mammals but not the animals.

In the case of Resident Marine Mamals v. Reyes, the Supreme Court held that the need to give the Resident Marine Mammals legal standing has been eliminated by our Rules, which allow any Filipino citizen, as a steward of nature, to bring a suit to enforce our environmental laws. It is worth noting here that the Stewards are joined as real parties in the Petition and not just in representation of the named cetacean species. The Stewards, Ramos and Eisma-Osorio, having shown in their petition that there may be possible violations of laws concerning the habitat of the Resident Marine Mammals, are therefore declared to possess the legal standing to file this petition.

18. Who are indispensable parties? Who are necessary parties?

1. Indispensable parties are real party-in-interest without whom no final determination can be had.

Necessary parties are parties who are not indispensable but ought to be joined as party if complete relief is to be accorded as to those already parties, or for complete determination or settlement of the claim subject of the action.

19. Is the non-impleading of indispensable party a ground for dismissal of the action? What is the effect of non-impleading the indispensable party?

1. Yes. The non-impleading of indispensable party is a ground for dismissal of the action. While failure to join an indispensable party will not result in the outright dismissal of the action. When the court orders to implead the indispensable party and goes unheeded, then the case may be dismissed for failure to comply with such order pursuant to Section 3, Rule 17 of the Rules of Court.

20. What is the effect of non-impleading of necessary party?  

1.  When the court orders the inclusion of the necessary party, non-compliance thereof shall constitute a waiver of the claim against such party if non-compliance is without justification.

However,  the non-inclusion of a necessary party does not prevent the court from proceeding in the action and the judgment rendered therein shall be without prejudice to the rights of such necessary party.

21. What is the distinction between a necessary and indispensable party?

1. The following are the distinctions between necessary party and indispensable party: (1) the party must implead the indispensable party or upon order of the court on its instance since joinder of indispensable party is mandatory while necessary party need not be impleaded in order to have a final determination of the case but only ought to be impleaded but the rule provides duty to the plaintiff in case of non-inclusion of a necessary party; and (2) when the court proceeds to the proceeding without an indispensable being impleaded in the case, all subsequent actions are null and void for want of jurisdiction whereas when the court proceeds to the proceeding without a necessary party despite court order does not render subsequent actions null and void but amounts to waiver of claim against such necessary party.

22. How should an unwilling co-plaintiff be treated?

1. Unwilling co-plaintiff may be treated as defendant and the reason why his consent was not obtained shall be stated in the complaint.

23. When may the plaintiff implead alternative defendants? Give an example.

1. The plaintiff may implead alternative defendants where he is uncertain against which of several persons he is entitled to relief, he may join any or all of them as defendants in the alternative although a right to relief against one may be inconsistent with a right to relief against the other.

24. What is the obligation of a counsel upon the death of a party?

1. It is the duty of the counsel of the deceased party to inform the court of the fact of death of the party within thirty (30) days after such death. The counsel has also the obligation to give the name and address of the legal representative of the deceased. This duty is mandatory and failure to comply therewith is a ground for disciplinary action.

25. What is the action that survives? What are actions that do not survive?

1. Actions that survives are those which are not extinguished by the death of a party such that it may be continued by the legal representative of the deceased party or its successors-in-interests whereas actions that do not survive are those which are extinguished by the death of a party such as actions which are purely personal to the deceased party.

26. Does the action of sum of money survive upon the death of the defendant? Supposing in an action for a sum of money, the defendant dies, should the case be dismissed? If not, can the judgment, assuming that it became final, be executed?

1. Yes. An action of sum of money survives upon the death of the defendant.
   
   

No. The case should not be dismissed. Section 20, Rule 3 of the Rules of the Court provides that when the defendant dies before entry of final judgment in the court in which the action was pending at the time of death, the court shall not dismiss the suit.

If in case the plaintiff obtains a favorable judgment, said judgment shall be enforced following the Rules prosecuting claims against the estate of the deceased person (Section 2, Rule 3 of the Rules of Court). Thus, the prevailing party is not supposed to file a motion for the issuance of an order and writ of execution of the judgment being a money claim against the estate of the decedent.

27. Give examples of actions that survive.

1. The following actions survives:(1) actions to recover real and personal property from the estate; (2) actions to enforce lien thereon; (3) actions to recover damages for an injury to person or property; and (4) action to recover damages arising from delicts.

28. What are the requisites of class suits?

1. The following are the requisites of class suits: (1) the subject of the controversy must be of common or general interest to many persons; (2) the persons are so numerous that it is impracticable to join all as parties; (3) the parties actually before the court are sufficiently numerous and  representatives to fully protect the interests of all concerned; and (4) the representatives sue or defend for the benefit of all.

29. Does class suit require commonality of interest?

1. No. Class suits do not require commonality of interest. The Rules only require a common or general interest in the subject matter of the litigation. 

30. Can there be a class suit to recover real property occupied by various individuals. Give an example of a class suit.

1. No. There can be no class suit to recover real property occupied by various individuals. Since, common or general interest over the subject matter of the controversy is wanting.

An example of class suit is where an action is filed for the preservation of the country’s resources. The Supreme Court agreed that the subject matter of the complaint is of common and general interest not just to several, but to all citizens of the Philippines.