RULE 7PARTS OF A PLEADING

SEC.1 CAPTION OF THE PLEADING

• The caption contains the following:

1. The name of the court2. The title of the action3. The docket number, if

assigned

TITLE OF THE ACTION• It contains the names of the parties whose

participation in the case shall be indicated. This means the parties shall be indicated as either plaintiff or defendant.

• They shall all be named in the original complaint or repetition;

• But in subsequent pleadings, it shall be sufficient if the name of the first party on each side be stated with an appropriate indication whether there are other parties. ( e.g. Pedro Reyes, et al.) (sec 1, Rule 7, Rules of Court)

SEC. 2 THE BODY OF THE PLEADING• The body of the pleading sets forth its designation,

the allegations of the party’s claims or defenses, the relief prayed for, and the date of the pleading.

• The allegations in the body of the pleading shall be divided into paragraphs and shall be so numbered for ready identification. This numbering scheme is significant because in subsequent pleadings, a paragraph may be referred to only by its number without need for repeating the entire allegations in the paragraph. Each paragraph shall contain a statement of a single set of circumstances so far as that can be done with convenience. (sec 2, Rule 7, Rules of Court)

HEADINGS; DESIGNATION OF CAUSES OF ACTIONS JOINED IN ONE COMPLAINT When two or more causes of action are

joined, the first cause of action shall be prefaced with the words, “first cause of action,” or the second cause of action by the words, “second cause of action,” and so on for the others (sec 2, Rule 7, Rules of Court)

ALLEGATIONS OF ULTIMATE FACTS1. Every pleading, including the complaint, is

not supposed to allege conclusions. A pleading must only aver facts because conclusions are for the courts to make.

2. Not all facts may be allowed as averments in a pleading. Under Sec. 1 of Rule 8, every pleading shall omit from its allegations statements of mere evidentiary facts. The rule prohibiting allegations of evidentiary facts in a pleading is not difficult to understand.

The rule requires that a pleading should contain only allegations of “ultimate facts,” i.e., the facts essential to a party’s cause of action or defense (Sec 1, Rule 8, Rules of court) or such facts as are so essential that they cannot be stricken out without leaving the statement of the cause of action inadequate (Canete v. Genuino ice company, 542 SCRA 206,217)

The ultimate fact are to be stated in a methodical and logical form and in a plain, concise and direct manner ( Sec. 1, Rule 8, Rules of Court)

ALLEGATIONS IN AN ENVIRONMENTAL CASE The complaint shall state that it is an

environmental case and the law involved (Sec

3. Rule 2, Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases). This allegation is aside from the allegation of the ultimate facts constituting the cause of action of the plaintiff.

RELIEF• Following the averments of the cause of

action of the plaintiff, the complaint must contain a statement of the relief sought from the court and to which he believes he is entitled. This portion of the complaint is oftentimes referred to as the “prayer.”

• The rule (Sec 2[c], Rule 7) requires that the pleading shall specify the relief sought although the statement may include a “general prayer for such further or other relief as may be deemed just or equitable.”

• It was ruled that under Sec 2. (c), Rule 7 of the Rules of Court, “a court can grant the relief warranted by the allegation and the proof evem if it is not specifically sought by the injured party; the inclusion of a general prayer may justify the grant of a remedy different from or together with the specific remedy sought, if the facts alleged in the complaint and the evidence introduced so warrant” (Prince Transport, Inc. V. Garcia, 639 SCRA 312, 330, January 12, 2011).

• The relief or prayer, although part of the complaint, does not constitute a part of the statement of the cause of action and the plaintiff is entitled to as much relief as the facts may warrant

• It is the material allegations of the complaint, not the legal conclusions made therein or the prayer that determines the relief to which the plaintiff is entitled

• To reiterate, it is important to remember that the court may grant a relief not prayed for as long as the relief is warranted by the allegations of the complaint and the proof.

SIGNATURE AND ADDRESS Every pleading must be signed by the

plaintiff or counsel representing him stating in either case his address. This address should not be a post office box ( Sec. 3, Rule 7).

In the absence of a proper notice to the court of a change of address, service upon the parties must be made at the last address of their counsel of record

A signed pleading is one that is signed either by the party himself or his counsel. Sec 3, Rule 7 is clear on this matter. It requires that a pleading must be signed by the party or counsel representing him. therefore, only the signature of either the party himself or his counsel operates to validly convert a pleading from one that is unsignes to one that is signed.

EFFECTS OF AN UNSIGNED PLEADING• The signature in a pleading is important for it

to have a legal effect. Under the rules of court (Sec. 3, Rule 7), “an unsigned pleading produces no legal effect.” The court however, is authorized to allow the pleader to correct the deficiency if the pleader shows to the satisfaction of the court, that the failure to sign the pleading was due to mere inadvertence and not to delay the proceedings (Sec. 3, Rule 7, Rules of Court).

SIGNIFICANCE OF THE SIGNATURE OF COUNSELThe signature of a counsel in a

pleading is significant. His signature constitutes a certificate by him that he has read the pleading, that to the best of his knowledge, information

and belief there is good ground to support it, and that it is not interposed for delay (Sec. 3, Rule 7,

Rules of Court)

It has been held that counsel’s authority and duty to sign a pleading are personal to him. “He may not delegate it to just any person because the signature of counsel constitutes an asuurance by him that he has read the pleading; that to the best of his knowledge, information and belief, there is a good ground to support itl and that it is not interposed for delay.

WHEN COUNSEL IS SUBJECT TO DISCIPLINARY ACTION IN CONNECTION WITH PLEADINGS A counsel shall be subject to disciplinary

action in the following cases:(a) When he deliberately files an unsigned pleading;(b) When he signs a pleading in violation of the rules;(c) When he alleges in the pleading scandalous or indecent matter;

(d) When he fails to promptly report to the court a change of his address (Sec 3, rule 7, Rules of Court)

VERIFICATION IN A PLEADING

Pleadings need not be under oath, verified or accompanied by affidavit, except when so required by law or a rule ( Sec. 4 Rule 7, Rules of Court)

HOW A PLEADING IS VERIFIED• A pleading is verified by an affidavit. This

affidavit declares that:(a) the affiant has read the pleading, and (b) that the allegations therein are true and correct of his personal knowledge or based on authentic record (Sec. 4, rule 7, rules of court)

• The verification requirement is “deemed substantially complied with when one who has an ample knowledge to swear to the truth of the allegations in the complaint or petition signs the verification, and when matters alleged in the petition have been made in good faith or are true and correct”

SIGNIFICANCE OF A VERIFICATION The verification requirement is significant, as

it is intended to secure an assurance that the allegations in a pleading are true and correct and not the product of the imagination or a matter of speculation, and that the pleading is filed in good faith

EFFECT OF LACK OF A VERIFICATION1. A pleading required to be verified but lacks the

proper verification shall be treated as an unsigned pleading (Sec. 4 Rule 7, Rules of Court). Hence, it produces no legal effect (Sec 3, Rule 7, Rules of Court). The lack of a proper verification is cause to treat the pleading as unsigned and dismissible.

2. It has however, been held that the absence of a verification or the non-compliance with the verification requirement does not necessarily render the pleading defective. It is only a formal and not a jurisdictional requirement. The requirement is a condition affecting only the form of the pleading and non compliance therewith does not necessarily render it fatally defective.

3. The absence of a verification may be corrected by requiring an oath. The rule is in keeping with the principle that rules of procedure are established to secure substantial justice and that technical requirements may be dispensed with in meritorious cases. The court may order the correction of the pleading or act on an unverified pleading if the attending circumstances are such that a strict compliance with the rule may be dispensed with to serve the ends of justice.

OTHER REQUIREMENTS• All pleadings, motions, and papers filed in court

by counsel shall bear, in addition to counsel’s current professional tax receipt number (PTR), counsel’s current IBP official receipt number indicating its date of issue. Pleadings, motions, and papers which do not comply with this requirement may not be acted upon by the court, without prejudice to whatever disciplinary action the court may take against the erring counsel who shall likewise be required to comply with the requirement within five (5) days from notice. Failure to comply with such requirement shall be a ground for further disciplinary sanction and for contempt of court.

CERTIFICATION AGAINST FORUM SHOPPING The certification against forum shopping is a

sworn statement in which the plaintiff or principal party certifies in a complaint or initiatory pleading to the following matters:

a) That he has not commenced any action or filed any claim involving the same issues in any court, tribunal, or quasi-judicial agency and, to the best of his knowledge, no such other question or claim is pending therein;

(b) that if there is such other pending action or claim, a complete statemet of the present status thereof; and

(c)that if he shoul therefore learn that the same or similar action or claim has been filed or is pending, he shall report that fact within five (5) days therefrom to the court wherein his aforesaid complaint or initiatory pleading has been filed. (sec. 5, Rule 7, Rules of Court)

2. the certification is mandatory under Sec. 5 of Rule 7 but not jurisdiction over the subject of the action is conferred by law.

APPLICABILITY TO SPECIAL CIVIL ACTIONS The court held that the rule requiring a

certification against forum shopping applies as well to special civil actions since a special civil action is governed by the rules for ordinary civil actions, subject to the specific rules prescribed for a special civil action. Such specific rule for example, appears under rule 46, Sec. 3 which requires that every petition for certiorari be accompanied by a sworn certification of non-forum shopping

MEANING OF FORUM SHOPPING 1. the concept of forum shopping has been described in

various ways, to wit:

a) there is forum shopping “when a party repetitively avails of several judicial remedies in different courts, simultaneously or successively, all substantially founedd on the same transactions and the same essential facts and circumstances, and all raising substantially the same issues either pending in or already resolved adversely by some other court”

(B) THERE IS FORUM SHOPPING WHEN, AS A RESULT OF AN ADVERSE OPINION IN ONE FORUM, A PARTY SEEKS A FAVORABLE OPINION, OTHER THAN BY APPEAL OR CERTIORARI IN ANOTHER. THERE CAN ALSO BE FORUM SHOPPING WHEN A PARTY INSTITUTES TWO OR MORE SUITS IN DIFFERENT COURTS, EITHER SIMULTANEOUSLY OR SUCCESSIVELY, IN ORDER TO ASK THE COURTS TO RULE ON THE SAME OR RELATED CAUSES AND/OR TO GRANT THE SAME OR SUBSTANTIALY THE SAME RELIEFS ON THE SUPPOSITION THAT ONE OR THE OTHER COURT WOULD MAKE A FAVORABLE JUDGMENT.

(c) forum shopping consists of filing multiple suits involving the same parties for the same cause of action, either simultaneously or successively, for the purpose of obtaining a favorable judgment.

FORUM SHOPPING EXIST IN THE FOLLOWING:a) Identity of parties, or at least such parties

as represent the same interests in both actions;

b) Identity of rights asserted and relief prayed for, the relief being founded on the same facts; and

c) The identity of the two preceding particulars is such that any judgment rendered in the pending case, regardless of which party is successful would amount to res judicata

Forum shopping “occurs when a party attempts to have his action tried in a particular court or jurisdiction where he feels he will receive the most favorable judgment or verdict.”

THREE WAYS OF COMMITTING FORUM SHOPPING Filing multiple cases based on the same

cause of action and with the same prayer, the previous case not having been resolved yet (where the ground for dismissal is litis pedentia)

Filing multiple cases based on the cause of action and the same prayer, the previous case having been finally resolved ( where the ground for dismissal is res judicata); and

Filing multiple casess bases on the same cause of action, but with different prayers (splitting cause of action, where the ground for dismissal is also either litis pendentia or res judicata)

RATIONALE AGAINST FORUM SHOPPING1. The rationale agasinst forum shopping is

that a party should not be allowed to pursue simultaneous remedies in two different fora. Filing multiple petitions or complaints constitutes abuse of court processes, which tends to degrade the administration of justice, wreaks havic upon orderly judicial procedure, and adds to the congestion of theheavily burdened dockets of the courts.

The rule proscribing forum shopping seeks to promote candor and transparency among lawyers and their clients in the pursuit of their cases before the courts to promote the orderly administration of justice, prevent undue inconvenience upon the other party, and save the precious time of the courts. It also aims to prevent the embarrassing situation of two or more courts or agencies rendering conflicting resolutions or decisions upon the same issue

2. forum shopping is an act of malpractice, as the litigants trifle with the courts and abuse their processes. It is improper conduct and degrades the administration of justice. If the act of the party or its counsel clearly constitutes willful and deliberate forum shopping, the same shall constitute direct contempt, and a cause for administrative sanctions, as well as a ground for the summary dismissal of the case with prejudice.

HOW TO DETERMINE THE EXISTENCE OF FORUM SHOPPING

1. To determine whether a party violated the rule against forum shopping, the most important question to ask is whether the elements of litis pendentia are present or whether a final judgment in one case will result to res judicata in another. Otherwise stated, to determine forum shopping, the test is to see whether in the two or more cases pending, there is:

(a) identity of parties, (b) identity of rights or causes of action, and (c) identity of reliefs sought

2. Forum shopping exists when the elements of litis pendentia are present or where a final judgment in one case will amount to res judicata in another. Litis pendentia requires the concurrence of the following 3 requisites:

(a) identity of parties, or at least such parties as those representing the same interests in both actions;

(b) identity of rights asserted and reliefs prayed for, the reliefs being founded on the same facts; and

and (c) identity with respect to the two preceding particulars in the two cases, such that any judgment that may be rendered in the pending case, regardless of which party is succesful would amount to res adjudicata in the other case.

3. Where the reliefs sought in the two actions are different, there is no forum shopping even if the parties in the actions are same. Where one action is for a permanent injunction and the other is a petition for certiorari, there is no identity of reliefs.

4. Where the reliefs sought in two courts involving the same parties is to restrain a government official from implementing the same order, there is forum shopping because there is identity of reliefs

5. The filing of six appeals, complaints or petitions to frustrate the execution of a judgment is a clear sense of forum shopping

6. The concept of forum shopping applies not only with respect to suits filed in the courts but also in connection with litigations commenced in the courts while an administrative proceeding is pending in order to defeat administrative processes and in anticipation of an unfavorable administrative ruling.

7. At its most basic, however, prohibited forum shopping refers to “actions involving the same issues”

8. To file an ordinary appeal and a petition for certiorari with the court of appeals is to engage in forum shopping

WHO EXECUTES THE CERTIFICATION AGAINST FORUM SHOPPING 1. It is the plaintiff or principal party whoe xecutes

the certification under oath (sec. 5, rule 7, Rules of Court)

REASON: It is the petitioner and not the counsel who is in the best position to know whether he or it actually filed or caused the filing of a petition. A certification signed by counsel is a defective certification and is a valid cause for dismissal. (GR and Prevailing rule)

RULE IF THERE ARE SEVERAL PLAINTIFFS OR PETITIONERS; EXCEPTION

The certification against forum shopping must ne signed by all the plaintiffs or petitioners in a case; otherwise those who did not sign will be dropped as parties to the case.

LIBERAL INTERPRETATION OF THE RULES ON THE SIGNING;

It has also been held that the rules on forum shopping, which were precisely designed to promote and facilitate the orderly administration of justice, should not interpreted with such absoulute literalness as to subvert its own ultimate and legitimate objective which is the goal of all rules or proceure.

Certificate of non-forum shopping is a mandatory requirement but Substantial compliance applies only with respect to the contents of the certificate but not as to its presence in the pleading wherein it is required.

Any liberal application has to be justified by special circumstances or by ample and sufficient reasons that maintain the integrity of, and do not detract from, the mandatory nature of the rule (BPI vs CA G.R. No. 168313)

SIGNING OF CERTIFICATE; PLAINTIFF IS JUDICIAL ENTITY When the plaintiff is a Judicial Entity, the

certificate may be executed by properly authorized person.

INITIATORY PLEADINGS; CERTIFICATION REQUIRED Sec. 5 of Rule 7 of the Rules of Court require

that a certification against forum shopping be attached to all “initiatory pleadings” or an application of a party asserting for relief.

Failure to comply will be a cause for dismissal of the case without prejudice

Does not apply to compulsory counterclaims

When a complaint is dismissed without prejudice by reason of failure to comply with the rule, it cannot be appealed.

The proper remedy is avail of the special civil action under Rule 65

DELIBERATE FORUM SHOPPING; EFFECTS A ground for summary dismissal, no motion

nor hearing required Subsequent case shall be dismissed with

prejudice

VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION

Non-compliance or a defect with the verification does the not render the pleading defective, the Court may order its submission or correction or act on the pleading if the circumstances so warrant.

Verification is substantially complied with when one with ample knowledge to swear to the truth of the allegations in the complaint or petition signs the same and its contents were made in good faith, true and correct.

On certifications, non-compliance or a defect cannot be cured by its subsequent submission or correction, unless there are special circumstances or compelling reasons.

All plaintiffs or petitioners must sign the certification, or they will be dropped as parties to the case except in certain cases where justifiable circumstances warrant a relaxation of the rules.

The certification must be executed by the party-pleader, not his counsel.

Under justifiable reasons however, a Special Power of Attorney may allow his counsel to sign in his behalf