Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
Download as docx, pdf, or txt
You are on page 1of 4
b.
That the spouse of the petitioner has
been judicially declared an absentee; c. That loss of parental authority of the spouse of petitioner has been decreed by the court; d. That the spouse of the petitioner has abandoned the latter or failed to comply with his or her obligations to the family as provided for in Art. 101; e. That the spouse granted the power of administration in the marriage settlements has abused that power; and f. That at the time of the petition, the spouses have been separated in fact for at least one year and reconciliation is highly improbable. 5. Art. 142 - The administration of all classes of exclusive property of either spouse may be transferred by the court to the other spouse: a. When one spouse becomes the guardian of the other; b. When one spouse is judicially declared an absentee; c. When one spouse is sentenced to a penalty which carries with it civil interdiction; or d. When one spouse becomes a fugitive from justice or is in hiding as an accused in a criminal case. NOTE: If the other spouse is not qualified by reason of incompetence, conflict of interest, or any other just cause, the court shall appoint a suitable person to be the administrator. REAL PARTIES-IN-INTEREST; INDISPENSABLE PARTIES; REPRESENTATIVES AS PARTIES; NECESSARY PARTIES; INDIGENT PARTIES; ALTERNATIVE DEFENDANTS Kinds of parties in a civil action (RIR-NIP) 1. Real parties in interest; 2. Indispensable parties; 3. Representatives as parties; 4. Necessary parties; 5. Indigent parties; and 6. Pro-forma parties. REAL PARTY-IN-INTERST He or she is the party who stands to be: (BIE) 1. Benefited; 2. Injured by the judgment in the suit; or 3. The party entitled to the avails of the suit (Sec. 2, Rule 3) NOTE: The interest must be ‘real,’ which is a present substantial interest as distinguished from a mere expectancy or a future, contingent subordinate or consequential interest. (Rayo v. Metrobank, G.R. No. 165142, December 10, 2007) It is an interest that is material and direct, as distinguished from a mere incidental interest in the question. (Samaniego v. Aguila, G.R. No. 125567, June 27, 2000) Reasons why actions should be filed under the name of the real-party-in-interest 1. To prevent the prosecution of actions by persons without any right, title or interest in the case; 2. To require that the actual party entitled to legal relief be the one to prosecute the action; 3. To avoid multiplicity of suits; and 4. To discourage litigation and keep it within certain bounds, pursuant to sound public policy. (Albano, 2017, citing Oco v. Limbaring, G.R. No. 161298, January 31, 2006; Stronghold Ins. Co., v. Cuenca, G.R. No. 173297, March 6, 2013) NOTE: The mere failure to include the name of a party in the title of the complaint is not fatal because the Rules of Court requires the courts to pierce the form and go into the substance and not be misled by a false or wrong name in the pleadings. Hence, if the body indicates the defendant as a party to the action, his omission in the title is not fatal. (Vlason Enterprises v. CA, 310 SCRA 26, 58-59, G.R. Nos. 121662-64, July 6, 1999) Q: Miñoza is a duly licensed owner operator of a cockpit. His temporary license to operate a new cockpit was revoked. Thereafter, a public bidding for a 25-year franchise of the cockpit operation was opened. Among four of the qualified parties that submitted their cash bids were Marcelo Epe and Miñoz’s uncle, Jose Uy. Miñoza did not personally join the bidding. Marcelo won in the public bidding and was granted the franchise. Miñoza filed a case to annul REMEDIAL LAW 46 U NIVERSITYOFSANTOTOMAS 2 02 1G OLDENN OTES the bidding process and grant of franchise to Marcelo. The trial court dismissed the complaint. Can Miñoza file the suit? A: NO. Miñ oza, not being one of the bidders clearly has no personality to contest the alleged rigged bidding and grant of the franchise to Marcelo. Every action must be prosecuted or defended in the name of the real party-in-interest, who stands to be benefited or injured by the judgment in the suit, or the party entitled to the avails of the suit. By real interest is meant a present substantial interest, as distinguished from a mere expectancy or a future, contingent, subordinate, or consequential interest” (Miñoza v. Lopez, G.R. No. 170914, April 13, 2011). Q: The heirs of Hilaria and Elena affirmed the waiver of rights over a property in favor of Francisca. However, some of the heirs refused to do so. This prompted Francisca to file an action for quieting of title. Estanislao De Vera, not a named defendant in the case, filed an answer, presenting himself as the real party-in-interest on the ground that some of the named defendants executed a Deed of Renunciation of Rights in his favor. The RTC admitted his answer but, later on, set it aside and ordered him to file a pleading-in-intervention. Can De Vera participate in the case without filing a pleading-in-intervention? A: YES. De Vera is not a stranger to the action but a transferee pendente lite. His interest cannot be considered and tried separately from the interest of the named defendants as his rights were derived from them. De Vera’s interest is not independent of the interest of the named defendants. There may be no need for the transferee pendente lite to be substituted or joined in the case because, in legal contemplation, he is not really denied protection as his interest is one and the same as his transferors, who are already parties to the case (Medrano v. De Vera, G.R. No. 165770, August 9, 2010). Sole proprietorship has no juridical personality separate and distinct from the personality of the owner The law merely recognizes the existence of a sole proprietorship as a form of business organization conducted for profit by a single individual and requires its proprietor or owner to secure licenses and permits, register its business name, and pay taxes to the national government. The law does not vest a separate legal personality on the sole proprietorship or empower it to file or defend an action in court. The proprietor or proprietress can be considered as a real party-in-interest and has a standing to file a case. (Stanley Fine Furniture, Elena v. Gallano, G.R. No. 190486, November 26, 2014, as penned by J. Leonen) Pro forma party One who is joined as a plaintiff or defendant, not because such party has any real interest in the subject matter or because any relief is demanded, but merely because the technical rules of pleadings require the presence of such party on the record. (Samaniego v. Agulia, G.R. No. 125567, June 27, 2000) INDISPENSABLE PARTY Party in interest without whom no final determination can be had of an action. (Sec. 7, Rule 3) An indispensable party is one whose interest in the subject matter of the suit and the relief sought are so inextricably intertwined with other parties that his legal presence as a party to the proceeding is an absolute necessity. (Riano, 2019, citing Benedicto-Muñoz v. Cacho-Olivares, G.R. No. 179121, November 9, 2015) NOTE: The joinder of indispensable parties is mandatory. The presence of indispensable parties is necessary to vest the court with jurisdiction, which is "the authority to hear and determine a cause, the right to act in a case". (Lottte Phil. Co., Inc. v. Dela Cruz, et al., G.R. No. 166302, July 28, 2005) The absence of an indispensable party renders all subsequent actions of the court null and void for want of authority to act, not only as to the absent parties but even as to those present. (Riano, 2014) Tests to determine whether a party is an indispensable party 1. Can relief be afforded to the plaintiff without