More expeditious

The draft of the Revised Rules of Civil Procedure indeed contains significant innovations effectively eliminating the many causes of delay in the resolution of civil cases by the trial courts.

First among these changes are the alternative dispute resolutions even before cases are filed in court. A plaintiff cannot file a case without a written demand upon the defendant seeking a meeting to negotiate settlement. And the defendant cannot put up a counterclaim without counter demanding and agreeing to meet with the plaintiff or his representative. If this direct negotiation fails, another attempt at settlement should be made through neutral mediators like common friends, business associates, nationwide legal aid facilities of the Integrated Bar of the Philippines (IBP), legal aid clinics of law schools, and the barangays.

If these negotiations fail, the basic pleadings to be filed by plaintiff and defendant must allege both the ultimate and the evidentiary facts on which their cases stand unlike in the existing rule where the parties need to allege only the ultimate facts and just make the full disclosure of the other evidentiary facts at the trial. This requirement would facilitate a clear understanding of the case and the issues between the parties and thus help direct its course from the very start.

But before issuing the summons upon filing of a complaint, the court will examine the complaint and dismiss it outright if it finds that it has no jurisdiction over the subject matter, the action has already prescribed or the pre-conditions for filing a complaint have not been complied. Lack of jurisdiction over the person due to improper service of summons and non-payment of docket fees are no longer grounds for outright dismissal. The court will just allow plaintiff 15 days from notice to cure the defect.

If the complaint is not dismissed and summons is issued, the defendant may raise in the answer as affirmative defenses any of the grounds for dismissing the complaint. The court will act on these grounds for dismissal within 15 days from receipt of plaintiff’s comment thereon. So a motion to dismiss is no longer necessary before the court can dismiss the case.

After the filing of their pleadings when the issues have been joined, a second mediation will be conducted through court trained mediators. So the plaintiff initially pays only 50% of the filing fee based on the possibility that the case would be settled before going to actual trial. It is only when the mediation fails and the case is returned to the court for trial when the plaintiff will pay the balance of the filing fee.

To remove the “bottleneck at the witness stand”, the 2012 Judicial Affidavit Rule has also been adopted so that the direct testimonies of witnesses are now dispensed with and substituted by their judicial affidavits. Thus the parties are required to submit before the scheduled preliminary conference, all their evidence in the forms of judicial affidavits, documentary or object exhibits already marked and authenticated. This requirement enables the court to determine before going to trial where the factual issues between the parties lie so that it could cut through the preliminaries and directly focus on the disputed matters.

In lieu of pre-trial briefs, the proposed rules require counsel from both sides to help the court draft a court paper called the Terms of Reference that includes: (1) a statement of the admitted facts; (2) a fair and concise summary of the facts to be proven by plaintiff’s and defendant’s evidence respectively; (3) a clear statement of the factual issue or issues presented by the evidence of both parties that will determine the outcome of the case on the merits; (4) a list of the  witnesses from either side who are competent to testify on such factual issue/issues; and (5) a statement of the actual or potential legal issues of the case.

And so at the preliminary conference the court shall, in consultation with the parties, issue an Order of Trial (a) fixing a sequence on which the issues set forth in the Terms of Reference are to be tried, and (b) identifying the witnesses who should be present to testify on those issues.

But before moving on to trial, the court will once more try to settle the case by referring it to a pairing judge for judicial dispute resolution conference, Said judge, acting as mediator, shall exert every suitable effort for the parties to arrive at an amicable agreement using his knowledge of their relative positions based on the Terms of Reference attached to the record forwarded to him.

During the trial, the judge will be an active facilitator in eliciting the needed evidence by having priority over counsel in examining the witnesses and in setting the tone and scope of such examination so as to determine their credibility, ascertain the truth of their testimonies and get the answers needed for resolving the issues. In this way, the inequality of the protagonists and the mismatch between opposing lawyers usually hounding the adversarial system is minimized.

There will also be a “face to face” trial where the witnesses from either side appear before the court facing each other around a table in a non-adversarial environment. They simultaneously swear to the truth of their answers to the questions from the court respecting the factual or closely related issues one at a time. Here the witnesses are given equal time to reply to each other until the issue at hand has been fully considered. When the court is through, counsel would then conduct cross and re-direct examinations of the witnesses. To dispense with interpretation and to be more spontaneous and straightforward, the testimonies of the witnesses are in Pilipino.

The court will hold a regular trial if the issues are complex and the witnesses are numerous by scheduling the hearings of the different issues on different dates where only the relevant witnesses need to come. At the end of the staggered trial of the issues, the parties will file their respective memorandum after which the court shall set a date for oral argument and decide the case in 90 days.

If the issues are simple and the witnesses are few, the court may at its option hold a simple one time face to face adjudication hearing and examination of the witnesses. Thereafter, it shall hear the parties on oral argument then render a verbal judgment subject to the issuance of a written decision. The court may, at its option, require the winning party to prepare a draft decision, copy furnished the losing party.

E-mail: [email protected]