i. Personal

Residence.

Personal / actual / physical habitation, his actual residence or place of abode and not his permanent legal residence of domicile. (Fule v. CA, G.R. Nos. L-40502 & 42670, 1976; Pilipinas Shell v. Dumlao, G.R. No. 44888, 1992).

Service of Notice of Appeal

GR: It should be served upon the adverse party or his counsel by personal service.

XPN: If personal service of the copy of notice of appeal cannot be made upon the adverse party or his counsel, service may be done by registered mail or substituted service (Rule 122, Sec. 4).

The appellate court may, in its discretion, entertain an appeal notwithstanding failure to give such notice if the interests of justice so require (Rule 122, Sec. 5).

The fact that no copy of the notice of appeal is served upon the adverse party is not fatal to the perfection of the appeal as long as the notice of appeal had been filed on time. (People v. Villanueva, G.R. No. L-1876, 1966)

Withdrawal of Appeal in RTC (Rule 122, Sec. 12) The appellant may withdraw his appeal filed in MTC before the record has been forwarded to the RTC

If the record has been forwarded, withdrawal may only be allowed if:

• A motion to withdraw is filed
• Motion is filed before the RTC renders judgment

When Required

Personal service within the forum is MANDATORY in actions in personam to acquire jurisdiction over person of defendant.

In an action strictly in personam, personal service on the defendant is the preferred mode of service, that is, by handing a copy of the summons to the defendant in person. (Imelda Manotoc v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 130974, 2006)

Sheriffs are asked to discharge their duties on the service of summons with due care, utmost diligence, and reasonable promptness and speed so as not to prejudice the expeditious dispensation of justice. Thus, they are enjoined to try their best efforts to accomplish personal service on defendant. On the other hand, since the defendant is expected to try to avoid and evade service of summons, the sheriff must be resourceful, persevering, canny, and diligent in serving the process on the defendant. (Constantino Pascual v. Lourdes Pascual, G.R. No. 171916, 2009)

Q: Bank A filed a complaint against Corp A and Mr. X for unheeded demands for the payment of credit accommodation. Both were served with summonses and copies of the order of the RTC granting a writ of preliminary attachment. On the same day, the sheriff levied and garnished properties of Corp A and Mr. X, who now alleges that the RTC did not acquire jurisdiction over them for invalid service of summons. Did the RTC acquire jurisdiction?

A: No. Jurisdiction over a defendant in a civil case is acquired either through: (1) service of summons or through (2) voluntary appearance in court and submission to its authority.

The service of summons here is defective. According to the Rules of Court, the summons shall be served by handling a copy thereof to the defendant in person. Only in instances wherein, for justifiable causes, the defendant cannot be served within a reasonable time, may summons be effected through substituted service, i.e., (a) by leaving copies of the summons at the defendant's residence with some person of suitable age and discretion then residing therein, or (b) by leaving the copies at the defendant's office or regular place of business with some competent person in charge thereof. As to parties that are domestic private juridical entities, service may be made only upon the president, managing partner, general manager, corporate secretary, treasurer, or in-house counsel. In the absence of service of summons or when the service of summons upon the person of the defendant is defective, the court acquires no jurisdiction over his person, and the proceedings and any judgment rendered are null and void.

There was no voluntary submission to the jurisdiction of the RTC on the part of Mr.X. Indeed, despite the lack of valid service of summons, the court can still acquire jurisdiction over the person by virtue of voluntary appearance. According to the Rules of Court, the defendant's voluntary appearance in the action shall be equivalent to service of summons. As a general rule, one who seeks an affirmative relief is deemed to have submitted to the jurisdiction of the court. Thus, it has been held that the filing of motions to admit answer, for additional time to file answer, for reconsideration of a default judgment, and to lift order of default with motion for reconsideration is considered voluntary submission to the trial court's jurisdiction. However, the inclusion in a motion to dismiss on other grounds aside from lack of jurisdiction over the person of the defendant shall not be deemed a voluntary appearance. Another exception is a special appearance when the defendant explicitly and unequivocally poses objections to the jurisdiction of the court over his person. (United Coconut Planters Bank v. Spouses Sy, G.R. No. 204753, March 27, 2019.)

A summons may be served personally wherever the defendant is found within the Philippine. As stated in Sansio Philippines Inc. v Sps, Mogol, G.R. No. 177007, 2009, “Section 6, Rule 14 of the Rules of Court does not require that the service of summons on the defendant in person must be effected only at the latter’s residence as stated in the summons. On the contrary, said provision is crystal clear that, whenever practicable, summons shall be served by handing a copy thereof to the defendant; or if he refuses to receive and sign for it, by tendering it to him. Nothing more is required.”

Tender is part of service of summons and NOT a separate mode of service. (Riano, Civil Procedure: A Restatement for the Bar, 2nd ed, 2009)

Tendering summons is itself a means of personal service. Personal service of summons has nothing to do with the location where summons is served. A defendant's address is inconsequential. Rule 14, Section 6 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, as amended by A.M. No. 19-10-20-SC, is clear in what it requires: personally handing the summons to the defendant (albeit tender is sufficient should the defendant refuse to receive and sign). What is determinative of the validity of personal service is, therefore, the person of the defendant, not the locus of service. (Sps Manuel v Ong, G.R. No. 205249, 2014)

Against a NONRESIDENT, jurisdiction over the defendant is acquired by service upon his person while said defendant is within the Philippines. If the non-resident defendant is not in the Philippines, and the action is an action in personam, Philippine courts cannot acquire jurisdiction over the defendant, unless he voluntarily appears in court. (Macasaet v. Co, G.R. No. 156759, 2013)

“Reasonable Time” Requirement

Reasonable time is defined as “so much time as is necessary under the circumstances for a reasonably prudent and diligent man to do, conveniently, what the contract or duty requires that should be done, having a regard for the rights and possibility of loss, if any to the other party.” (Imelda Manotoc v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 130974, 2006)

What then is a reasonable time for the sheriff to effect a personal service in order to demonstrate impossibility of prompt service? To the plaintiff, “reasonable time” means no more than seven (7) days since an expeditious processing of a complaint is what a plaintiff wants.

To the sheriff, “reasonable time” means 15 to 30 days because at the end of the month, it is a practice for the branch clerk of court to require the sheriff to submit a return of the summons assigned to the sheriff for service. The Sheriff’s Return provides data to the Clerk of Court, which the clerk uses in the Monthly Report of Cases to be submitted to the Office of the Court Administrator within the first ten (10) days of the succeeding month. Thus, one month from the issuance of summons can be considered “reasonable time” with regard to personal service on the defendant. (Constantino Pascual v. Lourdes Pascual, G.R. No. 171916, 2009)

How is the writ served

The writ should be served against the respondent, preferably in person. If personal service cannot be made, the rules on substituted service shall apply. (R7, S6)

Service on Individuals:

General Rule: Personal Service within the forum

Parties who may Question the Validity of Search and Seizure

It can be contested only by the party whose rights have been impaired thereby, and that the objection to an unlawful search and seizure is purely personal and cannot be availed by third parties. (Stonehill v. Diokno, G.R. L-19550, 19 June 1967)

PLACE OF SALE

May be agreed upon by the parties; or

In the absence of such agreement, the sale will be held in:

• Sale or Real or Personal Property NOT Capable of Manual Delivery:
• Office of the Clerk of Court of MTC or RTC which issued the writ or was designated by the appellate court
• Sale of Personal Property Capable of Manual Delivery:
• Place where property is located. (Rule 39, Sec. 15)

MODES OF SERVICE

• PERSONAL SERVICE

The preferred mode of service. If another mode of service is used (other than personal service), the service must be accompanied by a written explanation why the service of filing was not done personally.

How Personal Service is made

• Delivering personally a copy to the party who is not represented by a counsel, or to his counsel; or
• Leaving a copy in counsel’s office with his clerk or with a person having charge thereof; or
• If no person is found in his office, or if his office is unknown, or if he has no office – by leaving the copy between 8 a.m. to 6 p.m. at the party’s or counsel’s residence, if known, with a person of sufficient age and discretion then residing therein.

Failure to comply with the explanation requirement may be cause for the paper to be considered as NOT having been filed.

• SERVICE BY MAIL

The preferred service by mail is by REGISTERED MAIL. Service by ordinary mail may be done only if no registry service is available in the locality of either the sender or the addressee.

PRIORITIES IN MODES OF SERVICE AND FILING

Whenever practicable, the service and filing of pleadings and other papers shall be done personally.

TESTIMONIAL KNOWLEDGE

Facts to which a witness can testify are those which he or she knows, from his or her personal knowledge.