Rule 17 of the Rules of Court (Philippines): Dismissal of Actions
(With references to the 2019 Amendments to the Rules of Civil Procedure, effective May 1, 2020)

I. OVERVIEW

Rule 17 of the Rules of Court governs the dismissal of civil actions in the Philippines. It lays down the procedural framework for a plaintiff or the court to terminate a case either voluntarily (initiated by the plaintiff) or involuntarily (due to the plaintiff’s fault or certain procedural lapses). Proper understanding of Rule 17 is crucial because dismissal can have far-reaching consequences, including whether the dismissal is with or without prejudice (i.e., whether the plaintiff is barred from refiling).

Under the 2019 Amendments (A.M. No. 19-10-20-SC), the structure and substance of Rule 17 largely remained the same but bear in mind the updated references to other rules (e.g., changes in timelines under the amended Rules). Rule 17 consists of four main sections:

Section 1. Dismissal upon notice by plaintiff
Section 2. Dismissal upon motion by plaintiff
Section 3. Dismissal due to fault of plaintiff
Section 4. Dismissal of counterclaim, cross-claim, or third-party complaint

Below is a meticulous analysis of each provision, jurisprudential nuances, ethical considerations, and sample forms.

II. VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL BY PLAINTIFF

A. Section 1. Dismissal Upon Notice by Plaintiff

Timing
- A plaintiff may file a notice of dismissal at any time before the service of an answer or a motion for summary judgment by the adverse party.
- The act of filing this notice requires no court approval if done within the stated timeframe.
Effect
- As a general rule, the dismissal is without prejudice to the plaintiff’s right to refile the case.
- Exception: “Two-Dismissal Rule.” If the plaintiff has previously dismissed the same claim in another court or the same court, the second dismissal via notice operates as an adjudication on the merits (i.e., with prejudice).
- Thus, under the two-dismissal rule, once the same claim is dismissed twice by way of notice, the plaintiff is forever barred from refiling that claim.
Jurisprudence
- Roque v. Lapuz, G.R. No. L-27460 (1974) – Clarifies that the notice of dismissal under Section 1 is a matter of right if no answer or motion for summary judgment has been served.
- Heirs of Arcadio Castro v. Lozada, G.R. No. 166339 (2010) – Emphasizes that an earlier dismissal in a different case or different forum may trigger the two-dismissal rule if the parties and cause of action are substantially the same.
Practical Tip
- Plaintiffs must be vigilant about whether defendants have filed any responsive pleading other than a motion to dismiss; an answer or a motion for summary judgment cuts off the absolute right to dismiss by mere notice.
- Lawyers must verify if there has been a prior dismissal of a similar action to avoid inadvertently triggering the “two-dismissal rule.”

B. Section 2. Dismissal Upon Motion by Plaintiff

Timing and Procedure
- If an answer or motion for summary judgment has already been served by the defendant, the plaintiff must move for dismissal by filing a motion in court.
- The dismissal is not a matter of right; it is subject to the approval of the court and usually upon just and equitable terms the court may impose (e.g., payment of costs).
Effect
- Generally, the dismissal is without prejudice, unless the court’s order states otherwise.
- The court may impose conditions or terms to ensure fairness to the defendant, especially if the defendant has already incurred substantial expenses.
Court Discretion
- The court typically grants the motion to dismiss unless substantial rights of the defendant will be prejudiced.
- Leonor v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 94541 (1991) – Affirmed that the court’s main concern is preventing unfair advantage or prejudice to the defendant.
- If a dismissal is granted under terms and conditions (e.g., payment of attorney’s fees and costs to defendant), the plaintiff must comply with these terms, otherwise the case remains pending.
Two-Dismissal Rule
- The “two-dismissal rule” typically applies only to dismissals under Section 1 (notice). If the first dismissal was by notice, and the second dismissal is likewise by notice, that triggers the rule.
- A dismissal under Section 2 (motion) is not automatically counted for the two-dismissal rule if the original dismissal was under Section 1, although courts have nuanced interpretations depending on the exact nature of the dismissals.
- Always verify if the same claim has been dismissed in an earlier case to determine whether the second dismissal might be with prejudice.

III. INVOLUNTARY DISMISSAL

A. Section 3. Dismissal Due to Fault of Plaintiff

Grounds
The court may motu proprio or upon a defendant’s motion dismiss an action based on the plaintiff’s fault, including:
- Failure to prosecute for an unreasonable length of time;
- Failure to comply with the Rules of Court or any order of the court;
- Failure to appear on the date of the presentation of evidence or at pre-trial, in certain circumstances.
Effect
- A dismissal for failure to prosecute or comply with rules or court orders shall generally operate as an adjudication on the merits (i.e., with prejudice) unless the court expressly provides otherwise.
- This type of dismissal bars the plaintiff from refiling the same claim, given that it is equivalent to a final adjudication.
Jurisprudence
- Santo Tomas University Hospital v. Surla, G.R. No. 129718 (1999) – Involuntary dismissal for failure to prosecute must be based on a clear showing of the plaintiff’s lack of interest or willful disobedience of court orders.
- Oñate v. Abrogar, G.R. No. 199093 (2016) – Reminds trial courts to use involuntary dismissal sparingly and to allow the plaintiff sufficient opportunity to explain or remedy procedural lapses, in the interest of substantial justice.
Due Process Considerations
- Courts often require notice to the plaintiff and an opportunity to be heard before ordering an involuntary dismissal, especially if the ground is failure to comply with a court order or prosecute.
- Nevertheless, a repeated or blatant disregard of procedures will justify immediate dismissal with prejudice.

IV. DISMISSAL OF COUNTERCLAIM, CROSS-CLAIM, OR THIRD-PARTY COMPLAINT

(Section 4)

General Rule
- The dismissal of a complaint does not automatically carry with it the dismissal of a counterclaim, cross-claim, or third-party complaint.
- These claims may continue independently if the defendant (or the party asserting such a claim) chooses to pursue them.
Voluntary Dismissal of Main Action and Effect on Counterclaims
- If a counterclaim has already been pleaded by the defendant prior to service upon him of the plaintiff’s motion to dismiss, the dismissal shall be limited to the complaint unless the defendant manifests that he also seeks to have his counterclaim dismissed.
- If the defendant chooses to proceed, the counterclaim stands as an independent action that must be resolved on the merits.
Exceptions
- If the counterclaim is purely permissive and hinges entirely on the existence of the main complaint (e.g., it does not have its own basis for relief), the dismissal of the main action might result in the practical dismissal of the counterclaim. This depends on the nature of the counterclaim and the specific wording of the pleading.

V. LEGAL ETHICS CONSIDERATIONS

Avoiding Dilatory Tactics
- A lawyer must not abuse the right to dismiss actions as a strategy for delay or harassment. Under the Code of Professional Responsibility, such conduct may be deemed unethical, as lawyers must employ only fair and honest means to attain justice for their clients.
Duty to Client vs. Duty to Court
- While counsel must advocate for the client’s best interests (which can include filing a notice of dismissal before an unfavorable answer is filed), there is also a duty to the court to avoid forum shopping and abuse of process.
- If a second filing is made after a first voluntary dismissal, the lawyer must be mindful of the “two-dismissal rule” so as not to commit professional misconduct by refiling a barred claim.
Candor and Fairness
- Lawyers have a duty of candor: they must truthfully disclose prior dismissals if the question of the action’s history arises. Concealing prior dismissals to circumvent the two-dismissal rule may constitute serious ethical violations.

VI. LEGAL FORMS

Below are sample forms illustrating the typical structure. These are general templates and must be adapted to specific facts and court requirements.

A. Notice of Dismissal (Rule 17, Section 1)

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
[Branch Number], [City/Province]

[Name of Plaintiff],
   Plaintiff,
                                              CIVIL CASE NO. __________
       - versus -
[Name of Defendant],
   Defendant.
________________________________________/

         NOTICE OF DISMISSAL

Plaintiff, through undersigned counsel, respectfully states:

1. That an Answer or a Motion for Summary Judgment has not yet been served by Defendant;
2. Pursuant to Rule 17, Section 1 of the Rules of Court, Plaintiff hereby voluntarily dismisses this case without prejudice.

WHEREFORE, premises considered, Plaintiff respectfully files this Notice of Dismissal and prays that this case be considered DISMISSED without prejudice.

Respectfully submitted this __ day of __________ 20__, at [City].

   [Signature of Counsel]
   [Name of Counsel]
   [Roll of Attorney No.]
   [IBP No., PTR No., MCLE Compliance No.]
   Counsel for Plaintiff
   [Address & Contact Details]

B. Motion to Dismiss by Plaintiff (Rule 17, Section 2)

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
[Branch Number], [City/Province]

[Name of Plaintiff],
   Plaintiff,
                                              CIVIL CASE NO. __________
       - versus -
[Name of Defendant],
   Defendant.
________________________________________/

                MOTION TO DISMISS (By Plaintiff)

COMES NOW the Plaintiff, through undersigned counsel, and respectfully moves for the dismissal of this action, and states:

1. That Defendant has filed an Answer (or a Motion for Summary Judgment) on [date]; 
2. Due to [state reasons, e.g., settlement, change of circumstances, etc.], Plaintiff has decided to discontinue the case;
3. Rule 17, Section 2 of the Rules of Court allows the dismissal of an action upon motion by plaintiff upon such terms and conditions that the Honorable Court may deem proper.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff prays that this Honorable Court issue an Order DISMISSING this case, without prejudice and without pronouncement as to costs.

Respectfully submitted this __ day of __________ 20__, at [City].

   [Signature of Counsel]
   [Name of Counsel]
   [Roll of Attorney No.]
   [IBP No., PTR No., MCLE Compliance No.]
   Counsel for Plaintiff
   [Address & Contact Details]

C. Opposition to Dismissal (Example—if Defendant Objects)

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
[Branch Number], [City/Province]

[Name of Plaintiff],
   Plaintiff,
                                              CIVIL CASE NO. __________
       - versus -
[Name of Defendant],
   Defendant.
________________________________________/

     OPPOSITION (To Plaintiff’s Motion to Dismiss)

DEFENDANT, through undersigned counsel, respectfully files this Opposition to Plaintiff’s Motion to Dismiss, and states:

1. Plaintiff’s dismissal at this stage would unfairly prejudice Defendant because [state reasons, e.g., Defendant has incurred substantial expenses, or a summary judgment in Defendant’s favor is imminent];
2. Defendant prays that the case be decided on the merits or, in the alternative, that the dismissal be made with prejudice or under terms the Court may find just.

WHEREFORE, Defendant prays that this Honorable Court DENY Plaintiff’s Motion to Dismiss, or otherwise impose terms ensuring that Defendant’s rights and interests are protected.

Respectfully submitted this __ day of __________ 20__, at [City].

   [Signature of Counsel]
   [Name of Counsel]
   [Roll of Attorney No.]
   [IBP No., PTR No., MCLE Compliance No.]
   Counsel for Defendant
   [Address & Contact Details]

VII. KEY PRACTICE POINTERS

Always Check Whether an Answer or MSJ Has Been Served
- If none is served, plaintiff can file a notice of dismissal as a matter of right.
- If there is an answer or motion for summary judgment, a motion to dismiss is required, subject to court approval.
Be Aware of the Two-Dismissal Rule
- Plaintiffs should be wary of filing a second voluntary dismissal by notice under Section 1 if the same claim was previously dismissed in the same or another court; such second dismissal is deemed with prejudice.
Involuntary Dismissal: Heed Court Orders
- Plaintiffs must diligently prosecute and comply with all orders. Failure to do so can lead to dismissal with prejudice.
Effect on Counterclaims
- Dismissal of the main complaint does not automatically dismiss counterclaims or cross-claims. Check with your client/opposing counsel if they intend to proceed independently.
Ethical Responsibilities
- Lawyers must use the mechanisms under Rule 17 in good faith and in a manner consistent with their duties to the client, the court, and the administration of justice. Abuses can result in sanctions or disciplinary actions.

VIII. CONCLUSION

Rule 17 is a vital procedural safeguard that balances the plaintiff’s right to voluntarily terminate litigation and the defendant’s right to a fair and efficient resolution of the controversy. Properly invoking Rule 17 calls for a keen awareness of its provisions (both for voluntary and involuntary dismissals), the “two-dismissal rule,” and the effect on any existing counterclaims. Moreover, ethical and professional considerations are paramount—counsel must employ Rule 17 judiciously, avoiding any dilatory or oppressive tactics. Understanding these nuances ensures that parties and their lawyers can navigate dismissals strategically yet ethically, upholding the integrity of judicial proceedings.

Disclaimer: The above discussion and forms are for educational and reference purposes only. They do not constitute legal advice. Practitioners must tailor pleadings to the specific facts of the case, local court issuances, and the prevailing jurisprudence at the time of filing. Always consult the latest Supreme Court circulars and decisions for any updates or clarifications.