civ proc proper

8/13/2019 Civ Proc Proper

1/3

CIVIL PROCEDURE PROPER

Laws are classified as either Remedial or Substantive Law. Remedial Law is also known as Adjective or

Procedural Law.

REMEDIAL LAW vs.SUBSTANTIVE LAW

Q: Distinguish Remedial law from Substantive law?

A: SUBSTANTIVE LAW is that branch of the law which creates, defines and regulates rights. (Bustos vs.

Lucero, 81 Phil. 640; Ballentines Law Dict., 2nd., pp. 66, 1023) Like the Civil Code, the rights of children,

husband and wife, creditor and debtor are all found there.

REMEDIAL LAW is that branch of law which prescribes the method of enforcing rights or obtaining redress

for their invasion. (Ibid)Example of Remedial Law is the Rules of Court.

So a right is useless unless you enforce it. And the manner of enforcing rights is now prescribed by remedial

law. Like in civil cases, my neighbor borrowed from me but until now, despite several demands, he refused topay. Under the law on Obligations and Contracts, I have the right to collect. But how do I collect? Is it by

writing a letter to the judge, Dear Judge? or Is it by calling him on the phone? I-text ko kaya? Di puwede

yan! There must be a procedure. That is where the Civil Code leaves you behind and that is where the Rules of

Court will take over. So the 2 laws go hand in hand. That is what the SC said in the 1992 case of

DE DIOS vs. COURT OF APPEALS

212 SCRA 519 [1992] Cruz, J.

HELD: The 2 laws have a symbiotic relationship. They go hand in hand one supports the other.

They are not antagonistic towards each other.

Procedural rules are designed to insure the orderly and expeditious administration of justice by

providing for a practical system by which the parties to a litigation may be accorded a full and fair

opportunity to present their respective positions and refute each other's submissions under the

prescribed requirements, conditions and limitations. Adjective law is not the counterfoil of substantive

law. In fact, there is a symbiotic relationship between them. By complying faithfully with the Rules of

Court, the bench and the bar are better able to discuss, analyze and understand substantive rights and

duties and consequently to more effectively protect and enforce them.

ASPECTS OF REMEDIAL LAW

Q: Give the two (2) aspects of Remedial Law.

A: There are 2 aspects of Remedial Law:

PUBLIC ASPECT one which affords a remedy in favor of the State against the individual (e.g. criminal

procedure) or in favor of the individual against the State (e.g. habeas corpus) on the other

hand,

PRIVATE ASPECT one which affords a remedy in favor of an individual against another individual,

like the rules on civil procedure. (Gamboas Introduction to Philippine Law, 6th Ed., pp.

97-99)

BRIEF HISTORY OF THE LAW ON CIVIL PROCEDURE IN THE PHILIPPINES


2/3

The origin of our law on procedure is American. Forget the law on procedure during the Spanish regime. But

the first known ancestor of the law on Civil Procedure was the old Act 190, otherwise known as the Code of

Civil Procedure, which was enacted on August 7, 1901 by the United States and Philippine Commission.

And that was the law until 1940 because on July 01,1940 the SC enacted the Rules of Court which we now

call the Old Rules of Court. That continued for another 24 years until January 01, 1964 when the SC enacted the

Revised Rules of Court repealing the Old Rules of Court. And that continued for another 33 years until July

01,1997 where the SC enacted and which took effect on that day (July 01, 1997) the New Rules on Civil

Procedure.

SUMMARY:

First Law August 07, 1901 Act 190 Code of Civil Procedure (40 years)

Second Law July 01, 1940 Old Rules of Court (24 years)

Third Law January 01, 1964 Revised Rules of Court (33 years)

Fourth Law July 01, 1997 New Rules of Civil Procedure.

SOURCES OF THE 1997 RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE

Well of course the sources are almost the same as the prior law. The old Rules of Court is also a source.

Many provisions were taken from the 1964 Rules, substantive law like the Civil Code and jurisprudence. And ofcourse SC circulars. Many circulars are now incorporated under the new rule. So those are the main sources.

SOURCES:

Previous Rules of Court;

Jurisprudence;

New Civil Code;

SC Circulars

RULE-MAKING POWER OF THE SUPREME COURT

The Rules of Court (1940, 1964, 1997) have all been enacted by tile SC. It is law, not enacted by Congress

but enacted by the SC.

Q: What is the authority of the SC to enact a law when actually the role of the judiciary is only to interpret the

law? Is this not a violation of the separation of powers?

A: The authority of the SC in enacting the prior rules and the present rules is what you call its rule-making

power which provision was found in the 1935, 1973 and 1987 Constitutions. Based on the present law, the

rule-making power of the SC is expressed in Article VIII, Section 5, paragraph [5] which is substantially the

same as the 1935 and 1973 Constitutions. Only everytime they amend the Constitution, it is getting longer and

longer.

Rut the pertinent portion which has not been changed is that the SC shall have the power to promulgate rules

on pleading, practice and procedure. That is the authority of the SC in enacting the Rules of Court. But you

should know also the limitations.

LIMITATIONS TO THE RULE-MAKING POWER OF THE SC

The Constitution has also placed limitations on these powers. As currently worded, one limitation provided

for by the Article is the rules of procedure to be enacted by the SC shall provide for a simplified and inexpensive

procedure for the speedy disposition of cases. The second one is: the rules shall be uniform for all courts of the

same grade. And the third is: the rules shall not diminish, increase or modify substantive rights.

LIMITATIONS :


3/3

The Rules of Court shall provide a simplified and inexpensive procedure for the speedy disposition of

cases;

The Rules of Court shall be uniform for all courts of the same grade; and

The Rules of Court shall not diminish, modify or increase substantive rights.

Substantive rights are created by substantive law so the Rules of Procedure should not increase, diminish or

modify them. In effect, the Rules of Court should not amend the substantive law. It can only interpret substantive

law but should not change it completely. Those are the limitations. With that we are now ready to tackle the 1997

rules on civil procedure.

civ proc proper

Documents