Tuesday, December 4, 2012

Service of pleadings. - sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2012/november2012/178789.pdf

sc.judiciary.gov.ph/jurisprudence/2012/november2012/178789.pdf

"x x x.


There is no question that the Arcinues’ motion failed to comply with the requirement of Section 11, Rule 13 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure which provides:

 SECTION 11.  Priorities in modes  of service and filing. —
Whenever practicable, the service and filing of pleadings and other papers shall be done personally.  Except with respect to papers emanating from the court, a resort to other modes must be accompanied by a written explanation, why the service or filing was not done personally. A violation of this Rule may be cause to consider the paper as not filed.
                                                 

  Section 4.  Answer to complaint-in-intervention. — The answer to the complaint-in-intervention shall be filed within fifteen (15) days from notice of the order admitting the same, unless a different period is fixed by the court. (2[d]a, R12)

But the above does not provide for  automatic sanction should a party fail  to  submit  the  required  explanation.  It  merely  provides  for  that possibility considering its use of the term "may."  The question is whether or not the  RTC  gravely  abused  its  discretion  in  not  going  for  the sanction  of
striking out the erring motion.

The Court finds  no such grave  abuse  of discretion here.  As  the RTC pointed out,  notwithstanding that the Arcinues'  failed to  explain their resort to service  by registered mail rather than  by  personal service, the fact  is  that Lim's  counsel  expressly  admitted  having received  a  copy  of the  Arcinues' motion for judgment by default  on  December 7,  1998  or  I 0  days  before  its scheduled  hearing.  This  means  that  the  Arcinues  were  diligent  enough  to
file their motion by registered mail long before the scheduled hearing.

Personal  service  is  required  precisely  because  it  often  happens  that hearings do not push through because, while a copy of the motion may have been  served  by  registered  mail  before  the  date  of  the  hearing,  such  is received  by  the  adverse  patiy  already  after  the  hearing.  Thus,  the  rules
prefer  personal  service.  But  it  does  not  altogether  prohibit  service  by registered  mail  when  such  service,  when  adopted,  ensures  as  in  this  case receipt by the adverse party.

x x x."