Nature and purpose

Nature and purpose | Pre-trial (RULE 18) | CIVIL PROCEDURE

Disclaimer: The following discussion is a general, academic, and informational overview of Pre-Trial under Rule 18 of the Philippine Rules of Civil Procedure (as amended). It should not be taken as legal advice for any specific case. Always consult a qualified Philippine lawyer for advice tailored to your particular circumstances.

I. Overview of Pre-Trial (Rule 18)

Pre-trial in Philippine civil procedure is governed by Rule 18 of the Rules of Court, as substantially amended by the 2019 Amendments to the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure. It is a mandatory, litigation-streamlining conference where the parties and the court focus on clarifying and simplifying the issues, encouraging settlement, and expediting the resolution of the case.

Key References:

  1. Sections 1 to 8, Rule 18, 2019 Amendments to the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure
  2. A.M. No. 19-10-20-SC (2019 Proposed Amendments to the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure)
  3. Relevant Jurisprudence such as Mejia v. Pamaran, Torres v. Specialized Packaging, and other cases emphasizing the importance of pre-trial.

II. Nature of Pre-Trial

  1. Mandatory Character

    • Under Section 1, Rule 18, once the last pleading has been filed (e.g., answer to a complaint, answer to a counterclaim, reply, etc.), the court is required to set the case for pre-trial.
    • Failure to appear at pre-trial (without a valid excuse) can lead to dismissal of the case, if the plaintiff is absent, or the defendant being declared as in default, if the defendant is absent.

  2. Formally Litigated Conference

    • Although it encourages informal resolution and simplification, pre-trial is treated as a formal stage in litigation. The judge actively participates to ensure thorough and effective management of the case.

  3. Foundation of Efficient Case Management

    • Pre-trial is integral to the “caseflow management” approach under Philippine procedural rules. It is designed to promote a swift, cost-effective, and just disposition of cases by identifying controversies and minimizing dilatory tactics early.

  4. Judicial Intervention

    • The judge may issue orders directing the production of evidence, admissions, and disclosures. Judicial involvement ensures the narrowing of issues, identification of evidence, settlement possibilities, and scheduling of further proceedings.

III. Purpose of Pre-Trial

1. Amicable Settlement or Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR)

  • Primary Objective: Courts are mandated to encourage parties to consider an amicable settlement.
  • ADR methods (e.g., mediation, judicial dispute resolution, arbitration) may be ordered or suggested.
  • Section 2, Rule 18 specifically underscores the duty of the court to ensure that the parties explore the possibility of settlement, either partially or fully.

2. Simplification and Limitation of Issues

  • One of the top goals is to clarify what the real issues of the case are.
  • Parties are required to submit pre-trial briefs which lay out the proposed issues, lists of witnesses, documentary evidence, and the respective theories of each side.
  • The court, after due consideration, limits and defines the issues that will be tried, excluding irrelevant or repetitive matters.

3. Stipulations and Admissions

  • To save time, parties are encouraged to make admissions regarding key facts and documents.
  • Written or oral stipulations during pre-trial bind the parties unless otherwise modified for compelling reasons.
  • Admissions and stipulations shorten trial by dispensing with the need to present evidence on admitted or undisputed matters.

4. Avoidance of Surprises

  • By requiring disclosure of evidence, the identification of witnesses, and submission of documentary exhibits in advance, pre-trial reduces the risk of surprise at trial.
  • This promotes fairness and better preparedness of both court and counsel.

5. Orderly Presentation of Evidence

  • The pre-trial order dictates how trial will proceed:
    • The order typically includes a schedule for presentation of witnesses, marking of exhibits, and deadlines for the submission of other relevant matters (e.g., depositions, interrogatories).
    • This reduces confusion, clarifies the sequence of evidence, and sets guidelines for the trial proper.

6. Calendaring and Setting of Trial Dates

  • During pre-trial, the judge sets firm dates for further proceedings, including trial proper.
  • Deadlines for compliance with motions, discovery requests, and other procedural steps are also fixed.

7. Consideration of Other Matters

  • Other matters that can help dispose of the case at the earliest possible time may also be taken up at pre-trial, such as:
    • Propriety of summary judgment or judgment on the pleadings.
    • Referral to commissioners, when appropriate.
    • Bifurcation of issues (e.g., separate trials on liability and damages).

IV. Key Provisions under Rule 18

  1. Section 1: When conducted

    • The court shall set the case for pre-trial after the filing of the last pleading. Notice of pre-trial is sent to all parties.

  2. Section 2: Nature and purpose

    • Reinforces the objectives: (a) possibility of an amicable settlement or ADR; (b) simplification of issues; (c) amendment of pleadings, if necessary; (d) stipulations or admissions of fact and documents; (e) limitation of witnesses; (f) other matters to aid in the speedy disposition of the case.

  3. Section 6: Pre-trial brief

    • Parties must file and serve their pre-trial brief in accordance with the rules. Failure to file a pre-trial brief within the required period may be a ground for dismissal of the case or being declared in default.

  4. Section 7: Pre-trial order

    • The court issues a pre-trial order reciting the matters taken up at the pre-trial and the action taken thereon.
    • It controls the subsequent proceedings unless amended to prevent manifest injustice.

  5. Section 8: Court-annexed mediation

    • The case may be referred to mediation centers after pre-trial or any time it may appear beneficial for the early disposition of the case.
    • Parties may also be directed to undergo other modes of ADR.

V. Practical Points and Strategies

  1. Preparation is Paramount

    • Lawyers must thoroughly prepare for pre-trial. They should already have their theories, issues, witnesses, and evidence in order.
    • The submission of a pre-trial brief that complies with all requirements (list of issues, witness lists, evidence, possible admissions) is critical.

  2. Ensuring Client Attendance

    • Personal attendance of the party and counsel is required (unless excused for valid reasons).
    • Non-appearance without justification risks dismissal (if plaintiff) or default (if defendant).

  3. Maximizing Admissions/Stipulations

    • Counsel should seek to admit uncontested facts and documents to shorten and streamline litigation, saving both time and resources.

  4. Exploring Settlement

    • Courts encourage settlement discussions in good faith. A partial settlement can narrow the scope of issues for trial.

  5. Consequences of Non-Compliance

    • Failure to comply with the rules on pre-trial briefs, non-submission of documentary evidence, or unauthorized absence may lead to adverse rulings, including sanctions under the Rules of Court.

  6. Impact on Trial

    • The outcome of pre-trial shapes the parameters of the trial. Litigants will generally be prohibited from introducing new issues or evidence not disclosed at pre-trial (except in justified circumstances).

  7. Revisions under the 2019 Amendments

    • The 2019 Amendments reinforced the mandatory character of early court-annexed mediation.
    • The pre-trial order’s controlling effect over the subsequent proceedings is emphasized to avoid unnecessary motions and dilatory tactics.

VI. Legal and Ethical Considerations

  1. Candor and Good Faith

    • Lawyers must act with honesty and fairness throughout the pre-trial process, making only those claims and defenses that are warranted, and not withholding evidence.

  2. Avoidance of Dilatory Tactics

    • The spirit of the rules aims to expedite justice, so counsel must refrain from employing strategies that delay the resolution of cases.

  3. Respect for the Court and Opposing Counsel

    • Proper decorum and adherence to the rules of court are required. This fosters a cooperative environment conducive to a fair and swift resolution.

  4. Protection of Client’s Interests

    • Counsel must zealously advocate for the client but must balance such zeal with procedural and ethical rules ensuring honest disclosures and no frivolous claims.

VII. Relevant Jurisprudence

  1. Mejia v. Pamaran

    • Emphasized that pre-trial is mandatory and stressed the importance of the pre-trial order in controlling the course of the trial.

  2. Torres v. Specialized Packaging Development Corp.

    • Clarified that failure to appear at pre-trial, unless justified, can be fatal to a party’s cause (resulting in dismissal or default).

  3. Sarmiento v. Court of Appeals

    • Highlighted that stipulations and admissions made during pre-trial are binding, absent a clear showing of mistake or fraud.

  4. Universal Robina Corp. v. Lim

    • Underscored the policy favoring amicable settlement and the court’s responsibility to actively foster resolution without trial when possible.

These decisions collectively illustrate how seriously the judiciary regards pre-trial and how strictly they enforce compliance with Rule 18.

VIII. Conclusion

Pre-trial under Rule 18 of the Philippine Rules of Court is a crucial mechanism designed to expedite civil litigation, encourage settlement, and narrow the issues in controversy. Its nature is mandatory, and its purpose is multifaceted: promoting early resolution, ensuring proper case management, fostering admissions to avoid unnecessary proof, and paving the way for a prompt and fair trial.

Lawyers and litigants must treat pre-trial with utmost diligence, given its profound effect on the outcome of the case. Properly leveraging pre-trial can lead to quicker settlements, more focused trials, and significant savings of judicial and party resources. Non-compliance, on the other hand, can be detrimental, even fatal, to a party’s case. By thoroughly preparing for and actively participating in pre-trial, counsel and parties honor the Supreme Court’s policy of a speedy and efficient administration of justice.

Disclaimer: This content is not legal advice and may involve AI assistance. Information may be inaccurate.

Privacy Policy

Terms of Use

Lawyer Login

 
 
Privacy Policy         Terms of Use         Lawyer Login