JOANIE SURPOSA UY vs. JOSE NGO CHUA, G.R.
No. 183965, September 18, 2009.
“x x x.
Although respondent’s pleading was captioned a
Demurrer to Evidence, it was more appropriately a Motion to Dismiss on the
ground of res judicata.
Demurrer
to Evidence is governed by Rule 33 of the Rules of Court, Section 1 of which is
reproduced in full below:
SECTION 1. Demurrer
to evidence. – After the plaintiff has completed the presentation of his
evidence, the defendant may move for dismissal on the ground that upon the
facts and the law the plaintiff has shown no right to relief. If his motion is denied, he shall have the
right to present evidence. If the motion
is granted but on appeal the order of dismissal is reversed he shall be deemed
to have waived the right to present evidence.
Demurrer
to evidence authorizes a judgment on the merits of the case without the
defendant having to submit evidence on his part, as he would ordinarily have to
do, if plaintiff's evidence shows that he is not entitled to the relief sought. Demurrer, therefore, is an aid or instrument
for the expeditious termination of an action, similar to a motion to dismiss,
which the court or tribunal may either grant or deny.[1]
The
Court has recently established some guidelines on when a demurrer to evidence
should be granted, thus:
A demurrer to evidence may be
issued when, upon the facts and the law, the plaintiff has shown no right to
relief. Where the plaintiff's evidence
together with such inferences and conclusions as may reasonably be drawn
therefrom does not warrant recovery against the defendant, a demurrer to
evidence should be sustained. A demurrer to evidence is likewise sustainable
when, admitting every proven fact favorable to the plaintiff and indulging in
his favor all conclusions fairly and reasonably inferable therefrom, the
plaintiff has failed to make out one or more of the material elements of his
case, or when there is no evidence to support an allegation necessary to his
claim. It should be sustained where the plaintiff's evidence is prima facie
insufficient for a recovery.[2]
The
essential question to be resolved in a demurrer to evidence is whether
petitioner has been able to show that she is entitled to her claim, and it is
incumbent upon RTC-Branch 24 to make such a determination. A perusal of the Resolution dated 25 June 2008 of RTC-Branch 24 in
Special Proceeding No. 12562-CEB shows that it is barren of any discussion on
this matter. It did not take into
consideration any of the evidence presented by petitioner. RTC-Branch 24 dismissed Special Proceedings
No. 12562-CEB on the sole basis of res
judicata, given the Decision dated 21 February 2000 of RTC-Branch 9 in
Special Proceeding No. 8830-CEB, approving the Compromise Agreement between
petitioner and respondent. Hence, the
Resolution dated 25 June 2008 of RTC-Branch 24 should be deemed as having
dismissed Special Proceeding No. 12562-CEB on the ground of res judicata rather than an adjudication
on the merits of respondent’s demurrer to evidence. Necessarily, the last line of Section 1, Rule
33 of the Rules of Court should not apply herein and respondent should still be
allowed to present evidence before RTC-Branch 24 in Special Proceedings No.
12562-CEB.
X
x x.”
