Civil Procedure: Rules of Court, Rule 2 (A.M. No. 19-10-20-SC)

 RULE 2

CAUSE OF ACTION

Section 1. Ordinary civil actions, basis of - Every ordinary civil action must be based on a cause of action.

Section 2. Cause of action, defined. - A cause of action is the act or omission by which a party violates a right of another.

Section 3. One suit for a single cause of action. - A party may not institute more than one suit for a single cause of action. 

Section 4. Splitting a single cause of action; effect of - If two or more suits are instituted on the basis of the same cause of action, the filing of one or a judgment upon the merits in anyone is available as a ground for the dismissal of the others.

Section 5. Joinder of causes of action. - A party may in one pleading assert, in the alternative or otherwise, as many causes of action as he may have against an opposing party, subject to the following conditions:

(a) The party joining the causes of action shall comply with the rules on joinder of parties;

(b) The joinder shall not include special civil actions or actions governed by special rules;

(c) Where the causes of action are between the same parties but pertain to different venues or jurisdictions, the joinder may be allowed in the Regional Trial Court provided one of the causes of action falls within the jurisdiction of said court and the venue lies therein; and

(d) Where the claims in all the causes of action are principally for recovery of money, the aggregate amount claimed shall be the test of jurisdiction. 

Section 6. Misjoinder of causes of action. - Misjoinder of causes of action is not a ground for dismissal of an action. A misjoined cause of action may, on motion of a party or on the initiative of the court, be severed and proceeded with separately.  

Notes:

Sec 1.

• Section 1 of Rule 2 is entitled cause of action. 
• Section 1 expresses the principle that every ordinary civil action must be based on a cause of action. 
• In other words, there cannot be a case unless you have a cause of action. 
• No Cause of Action v. Complaint Failed to State Cause of Action
• No Cause of Action 
• ground to dismissal after evidence was presented and rested
• Demurrer?

Sec 2.

Q: Define cause of action.

A: Cause of Action is an act or omission by which a party violates a right of another.

Elements of Cause of Action

1. Existence of legal right in favor of the plaintiff by whatever means and under whatever law it arises or is created; 
2. A correlative obligation on the part of the named defendant to respect and not to violate such right; and
3. An act or omission on the part of such defendant in violation of the right of the plaintiff or constituting a breach of the obligation of the defendant to the plaintiff for which the latter may maintain action for recovery of damages or other appropriate relief.

• Briefly stated, it is the reason why the litigation has come about, it is the act or omission of defendant resulting in the violation of someone’s right.
• There is a fourth element added by some cases and commentators – the element of damage suffered by the plaintiff. 

ROVID

1. Right 
• Existence of legal right in favor of the plaintiff by whatever means and under whatever law it arises or is created; 
2. Obligation
• A correlative obligation on the part of the named defendant to respect and not to violate such right; and
3. Violation
• An act or omission on the part of such defendant in violation of the right of the plaintiff or constituting a breach of the obligation of the defendant to the plaintiff for which the latter may maintain action for recovery of damages or other appropriate relief.
4. Injury
• Illegal invasion of a legal right 
5. Damage
•  Loss, hurt, or harm which results from the injury.

• Even if there is violation, if there is no damage, then what relief are you asking for? There can be no action where no damage is sustained.
• As a matter of fact, in a recent case, the SC remarked that wrong or injury without damage or damage without wrong does not constitute a cause of action since damages are merely part of the remedy allowed for the injury caused by a breach or wrong. Injury is the illegal invasion of a legal right while damage is the loss, hurt, or harm which results from the injury.

Cause of Action not an issue in administrative cases 

• While the existence of a cause of action is one that is essential to the existence of a civil action, in administrative cases however, the issue is not whether the complainant has a cause of action against the respondent, but whether the respondent has breached the norms and standards of the office. (Mutia v. Purisima, 494 SCRA 448)

Cause of Action in Specific Cases 

• In breach of contract cases, a cause of action does not require an allegation of the negligence of the defendant but merely the following elements:

1. The existence of a contract, and
2. The breach of the contract. 

• Thus, if a carrier is sued based on a breach of contract of carriage, negligence need not be proved by the plaintiff, negligence not being an element of the cause of action of a suit predicated on a breach of contract. This is true whether or not the defendant is a public or a private carrier. 
• However, where the defendant is a common carrier there is an additional reason for dispensing with proof of negligence, i.e., negligence of the common carrier is presumed.
• In quasi delict, negligence, as an element, must be alleged and proved. (Art. 2176 CC) but the negligence of those persons described under Art. 2180 of the Civil Code, although based on quasi delict is presumed.
• Under Art. 2180, following the well-recognized doctrine of vicarious liability, certain persons like the father, mother, guardian, owners and managers of an establishment or enterprise, employee, the State, and teachers or heads of establishments of arts and trades are, under specified conditions, liable for acts of persons for whom they are responsible. 
• Thus, an employer for instance, is liable for the damage caused by his employees and household helpers acting within the scope of their assigned tasks. The employer’s negligence in the selection and supervision of his employee is presumed and his liability shall only cease if he successfully proves his observance of the diligence required of a good father of a family to prevent damage. 
• When an injury is caused to another by the negligence of the employee there instantly arises the juris tantum presumption of law that there was negligence on the part of the employer either in the selection or in the supervision, or both of the employee. The liability of the employer is direct and immediate and is not conditioned upon a prior recourse against the negligent employee and a prior showing of the insolvency of such employee. Therefore, it is incumbent upon the employer to prove his exercise of diligence of a good father of a family in the selection and supervision of the employee (Manliclic vs. Calaunan GR No. 150157 January 25, 2007) 
• Where the cause of action rests on a promissory note, filing the action before the due date of the obligation would be premature because the obligation is one with a period. Whenever a period is designated in an obligation, the obligation becomes demandable only when the period arrives. Such period is presumed to be for the benefit of both parties and of course, also of the debtor. He cannot be charged before the due date (Art. 1196, Civil Code) unless he loses the right to make use of the period (Art. 1198, Civil Code). 
• In an unlawful detainer case, the cause of action does not accrue unless there is a demand to vacate and is not complied with. If, however, the suit is based on expiration of the lease, notice and demand are not required. (Labastida v. CA, 287 SCRA 662)

Example of Cause of Action:

A borrows money from B promising to pay on a date certain. Upon due date, A did not pay. Does B have a cause of action? Let us examine whether the elements are present. 

• RIGHT – the right of the creditor to get back his money;
• OBLIGATION – The defendant has the obligation to pay back the loan under the law on contracts;
• VIOLATION or delict or wrong – the account fell due and the debtor is supposed to pay the creditor, but the former did not pay the latter;
• DAMAGE – the creditor cannot get back his money. So, the 4 elements are there. Of course, when you file a complaint against somebody, you do not prepare the complaint by enumerating the elements. In other words, you just narrate the facts. It is up for the defendant to analyze. It is the duty of the lawyer to analyze the complaint whether the 4 elements are present.

Damages arising from culpa aquiliana. You are crossing the street and you are bumped by X who was driving a car causing you injuries and being hospitalized. You also failed to report for work.

• RIGHT – it is the right of every person not to be molested. You have the right to walk peacefully and not to be harmed; 
• OBLIGATION – it is the obligation of every person driving to be careful so that he will not bump other people. You do not have to enter into a contract with a person saying you will not bump him; 
• DELICT or wrong – because of your recklessness, you violated his right by injuring him;
• DAMAGE – I have to spend money in the hospital and I lost my income. 

D borrowed money from you last year payable in January2010 but because you are in dire need of money you demanded payment. Suppose D does not pay can you file an action to collect the amount from him? Do you have a cause of action? 

• RIGHT – the creditor has the right to collect;
• OBLIGATION – every debtor has the obligation to pay; 
• DAMAGE – I have not recovered the money; 
• DELICT or wrong – there is NO delict yet. Why? There is no delict yet because the account is payable next year. So, it is still premature to file a collection case now because one element is missing. It is not based on a cause of action and is dismissible under Rule 16.

Cause of action must be unmistakably stated 

• The mere existence of a cause of action is not sufficient for a complaint to prosper. Even if in reality the plaintiff has a cause of action against the defendant, the complaint may be dismissed if the complaint or the pleading asserting the claim “states no cause of action”. (Sec. 1[g], Rule 16). 
• Read affirmative defense.
•  This means that the cause of action must unmistakably be stated or alleged in the complaint or that all the elements of the cause of action required by substantive law must clearly appear from the mere reading of the complaint. 
• To avoid an early dismissal of the complaint, the simple dictum to be followed is: “If you have a cause of action, then by all means, state it! State all of its elements in your pleading!” 
• Where there is a defect or an insufficiency in the statement of the cause of action, a complaint may be dismissed not because of the absence or a lack of a cause of action but because the complaint “states no cause of action.”
• The dismissal will therefore, be anchored on a “failure to state a cause of action.” 
• The failure to state a cause of action does not mean that the plaintiff has “no cause of action.”
• It only means that the plaintiff’s allegations are insufficient for the court to know that the rights of the plaintiff were violated by the defendant. Thus, even if indeed the plaintiff suffered injury, if the same is not set forth in the complaint, the pleading will state no cause of action even if factually or in reality the plaintiff has a cause of action against the defendant.

Action distinguished from Cause of Action 

• Action
• the suit filed in court for the enforcement or protection of a right, or the prevention or redress of a wrong. (Sec. 3[a]. Rule 2)
• Cause of action
• the basis of the action filed (Sec. 1, Rule 2).

Q: Define right of action.

•  A: Right of action is the right of the plaintiff to bring an action and to prosecute that action to final judgment. (Marquez vs. Varela, 92 Phil. 373) 
• It is the right of a person to commence and prosecute an action to obtain the relief sought. 

Q: What are the ELEMENTS of a right of action? 

A: There are three elements: 

1. The plaintiff must have a good cause of action;
2. Must be instituted by the proper party; and, 
3. He/she must have performed all conditions precedent to the filing of the action. 

• So, you cannot have a right of action unless you first have a cause of action.