Civil Procedure

Civil Procedure readers1 JOJO 2 12 2002-01-09T23:44:00Z 2002-01-09T23:44:00Z 3 1207 6885 supreme court 57 13 8455 9.2720 110

6. TRIAL (Rule 30)

A. Administrative Circular No. 3-99, Jan. 15, 1999

To insure speedy disposition of cases, the following guidelines must be faithfully observed:

I. The session hours of all Regional Trial Courts, Metropolitan Trial Courts, Municipal Trial Courts in Cities, Municipal Trial Courts and Municipal Circuit Trial Courts shall be from 8:30 A. M. to noon and from 2:00 P. M. to 4:30 P. M. from Monday to Friday. The hours in the morning shall be devoted to the conduct of trial, while the hours in the afternoon shall be utilized for (1) the conduct of pre-trial conferences; (2) writing of decisions, resolutions, or orders; or (3) the continuation of trial on the merits, whenever rendered necessary, as may be required by the Rules of Court, statutes, or circulars in specified cases.

However, in multi-sala courts in places where there are few practicing lawyers, the schedule may be modified upon request of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines such that one-half of the branches may hold their trial in the morning and the other half in the afternoon.

Except those requiring immediate action, all motions should be scheduled for hearing on Friday afternoons, or if Friday is a non-working day, in the afternoon of the next business day. The unauthorized practice of some judges of entertaining motions or setting them for hearing on any other day or time must be immediately stopped.

II. Judges must be punctual at all times.

III. The Clerk of Court, under the direct supervision of the Judge, must comply with Rule 20 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure regarding the calendar of cases.

IV. There should be strict adherence to the policy on avoiding postponements and needless delay.

Sections 2, 3 and 4 of Rule 30, 1997 Rules on Civil Procedure on adjournments and postponements and on the requisites of a motion to postpone trial for absence of evidence or for illness of a party or counsel should be faithfully observed.

Lawyers as officers of the court, are enjoined to cooperate with judges to ensure swift disposition of cases.

V. The mandatory continuous trial system in civil cases contemplated in Administrative Circular No. 4 dated 22 September 1988, and the guidelines provided for in Circular No. 1-89, dated 19 January 1989, must be effectively implemented. For expediency, these guidelines in civil cases are hereunder restated with modifications, taking into account the relevant provisions of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure:

B. Trial

1. Unless the docket of the court requires otherwise, not more than four (4) cases shall be scheduled for trial daily.

2. The Presiding Judge shall make arrangements with the prosecutor and the Public Attorney's Office (PAO) so that a relief prosecutor and a PAO attorney are always available in case the regular prosecutor or PAO attorneys are absent.

3. Contingency measures must likewise be taken for any unexpected absence of the stenographer and other support staff assisting in the trial.

4. The issuance and service of subpoena shall be done in accordance with Administrative Circular No. 4 dated 22 September 1988.

5. The judge shall conduct trial with utmost dispatch, with judicious exercise of the court's power to control trial proceedings to avoid delay.

6. The judge must take notes of the material and relevant testimonies of witnesses to facilitate his decision-making.

7. The trial shall be terminated within ninety (90) days from initial hearing. Appropriate disciplinary sanctions may be imposed on the judge and the lawyers for failure to comply with the requirement due to causes attributable to them.

8. Each party is bound to complete the presentation of his evidence within the trial dates assigned to him. After the lapse of said dates, the party is deemed to have completed the presentation of evidence. However, upon verified motion based on compelling reasons, the judge may allow a party additional trial dates in the afternoon; provided that said extension will not go beyond the three-month limit computed from the first trial date except when authorized in writing by the Court Administrator, Supreme Court.

I. All trial judges must strictly comply with Circular No. 38-98, entitled 'Implementing the Provisions of Republic Act No. 8493' ('An Act to Ensure a Speedy Trial of All Cases Before the Sandiganbayan , Regional Trial Court, Metropolitan Trial Court, Municipal Trial Court in Cities, Municipal Trial Court, and Municipal Circuit Trial Court, Appropriating Funds Therefore, and for Other Purposes') issued by the Honorable Chief Justice Andres R. Narvasa on 15 September 1998.

II.

1. As a constant reminder of what cases must be decided or resolved, the judge must keep a calendar of cases submitted for decision, noting therein the exact day, month and year when the 90-day period is to expire. As soon as a case is submitted for decision, it must be noted in the calendar of the judge; moreover, the records shall be duly collated with the exhibits and transcripts of stenographic notes, as well as the trial notes of the judge, and placed in the judge's chamber.

2. In criminal cases, the judge will do well to announce in open court at the termination of the trial the date of the promulgation of the decision, which should be set within 90 days from the submission of the case for decision.

3. All Judges must scrupulously observe the period prescribed in Section 15, Article VIII of the Constitution.

This Circular shall take effect on February 1,1999, and the Office of the Court Administrator shall ensure faithful compliance therewith.

City of Manila, 15 January 1999.

2. Some Rules

1. The order of trial stated above is followed in ordinarily contested cases. However, if the defendant in his answer admits the obligation alleged in the complaint but raises special defenses, then the plaintiff is relieved of the duty to present evidence in chief and so the defendant should start the proceeding by presenting his evidence to support his special defenses. 155

2. When Case Deemed Submitted for Decision in Trial Court

Under Administrative Circular No. 28 dated July 3,1989:

xxx

(3) A case is considered submitted for decision upon the admission of the evidence of the parties at the termination of the trial. The ninety (90) day period for deciding the case shall commence to run from submission of the case for decision without memoranda; in case the Court requires or allows its filing, the case shall be considered submitted for decision upon the filing of the last memorandum or the expiration of the period to do so, whichever is earlier. Lack of transcript of stenographic notes shall not be a valid reason to interrupt or suspend the period for deciding the case unless the case was previously heard by another judge not the deciding judge in which case the latter shall have the full period of ninety (90) days from the completion of the transcripts within which to decide the same.

(4) The court may grant extension of time to file memoranda, but the ninety (90) days period for deciding the case shall not be interrupted thereby.

(5) The foregoing rules shall not apply to Special Criminal Courts under Circular 20 dated August 7, 1987, and to cases covered by the Rule on Summary Procedure in which memoranda are prohibited.

xxx

Under Rule 30, Section 5(g), upon admission of the evidence, the case shall be deemed submitted for decision, unless the court directs the parties to argue or to submit their respective memoranda or any further pleadings.

As a general rule, no additional evidence may be presented at the rebuttal stage. Subject to the discretion of the court, additional evidence may be submitted:

(1) if it is merely discovered;

(2) omitted through mistake or inadvertence; or

(3) when the purpose is to correct evidence previously offered. 156

Under Administrative Matter No. 00-2-01-SC amending the Rule 141 of the Rules of Court on Legal Fees, it is provided in Sec. 2(b) that a fee shall be paid for motions for postponements, to wit:

For motions for postponement after completion of the pre-trial stage, one hundred (Php100) pesos for the first, and an additional fifty (Php50) pesos for every postponement thereafter based on that for the immediately preceding motion: Provided, however, that no fee shall be imposed when the motion is found to be based on justifiable and compelling reason.

155 Yu v. Mapayo, No. L-29742, March 29, 1972, 44 SCRA 163.

156 Lopez v. Liboro, 81 Phil. 429 [1948].