C. Prosecution of Civil Action (Rule 111)

C. Prosecution of Civil Action (Rule 111)

• Implied Institution of Civil Action Arising from Crime
• Prior Reservation, Suspension, Waiver of Civil Actions
• Independent Civil Actions (See also Civil Code, arts. 31-34)
• Civil Liability Ex-delicto
• In cases of Acquittal (See also Civil Code, art. 29)
• Death of the Accused
• Prejudicial Question (See also Civil Code, art. 36)

> RULE 111

Prosecution of Civil Action

Section 1. Institution of criminal and civil actions. — (a) When a criminal action is instituted, the civil action for the recovery of civil liability arising from the offense charged shall be deemed instituted with the criminal action unless the offended party waives the civil action, reserves the right to institute it separately or institutes the civil action prior to the criminal action.

The reservation of the right to institute separately the civil action shall be made before the prosecution starts presenting its evidence and under circumstances affording the offended party a reasonable opportunity to make such reservation.

When the offended party seeks to enforce civil liability against the accused by way of moral, nominal, temperate, or exemplary damages without specifying the amount thereof in the complaint or information, the filing fees thereof shall constitute a first lien on the judgment awarding such damages.

Where the amount of damages, other than actual, is specified in the complaint or information, the corresponding filing fees shall be paid by the offended party upon the filing thereof in court.

Except as otherwise provided in these Rules, no filing fees shall be required for actual damages.

No counterclaim, cross-claim or third-party complaint may be filed by the accused in the criminal case, but any cause of action which could have been the subject thereof may be litigated in a separate civil action. (1a)

(b) The criminal action for violation of Batas Pambansa Blg. 22 shall be deemed to include the corresponding civil action. No reservation to file such civil action separately shall be allowed.

Upon filing of the aforesaid joint criminal and civil actions, the offended party shall pay in full the filing fees based on the amount of the check involved, which shall be considered as the actual damages claimed. Where the complaint or information also seeks to recover liquidated, moral, nominal, temperate or exemplary damages, the offended party shall pay additional filing fees based on the amounts alleged therein. If the amounts are not so alleged but any of these damages are subsequently awarded by the court, the filing fees based on the amount awarded shall constitute a first lien on the judgment.

Where the civil action has been filed separately and trial thereof has not yet commenced, it may be consolidated with the criminal action upon application with the court trying the latter case. If the application is granted, the trial of both actions shall proceed in accordance with section 2 of this Rule governing consolidation of the civil and criminal actions. (cir. 57-97)

Section 2. When separate civil action is suspended. — After the criminal action has been commenced, the separate civil action arising therefrom cannot be instituted until final judgment has been entered in the criminal action.

If the criminal action is filed after the said civil action has already been instituted, the latter shall be suspended in whatever stage it may be found before judgment on the merits. The suspension shall last until final judgment is rendered in the criminal action. Nevertheless, before judgment on the merits is rendered in the civil action, the same may, upon motion of the offended party, be consolidated with the criminal action in the court trying the criminal action. In case of consolidation, the evidence already adduced in the civil action shall be deemed automatically reproduced in the criminal action without prejudice to the right of the prosecution to cross-examine the witnesses presented by the offended party in the criminal case and of the parties to present additional evidence. The consolidated criminal and civil actions shall be tried and decided jointly.

During the pendency of the criminal action, the running of the period of prescription of the civil action which cannot be instituted separately or whose proceeding has been suspended shall be tolled. (n)

The extinction of the penal action does not carry with it extinction of the civil action. However, the civil action based on delict shall be deemed extinguished if there is a finding in a final judgment in the criminal action that the act or omission from which the civil liability may arise did not exist. (2a)

Section 3. When civil action may proceeded independently. — In the cases provided for in Articles 32, 33, 34 and 2176 of the Civil Code of the Philippines, the independent civil action may be brought by the offended party. It shall proceed independently of the criminal action and shall require only a preponderance of evidence. In no case, however, may the offended party recover damages twice for the same act or omission charged in the criminal action. (3a)

Section 4. Effect of death on civil actions. — The death of the accused after arraignment and during the pendency of the criminal action shall extinguish the civil liability arising from the delict. However, the independent civil action instituted under section 3 of this Rule or which thereafter is instituted to enforce liability arising from other sources of obligation may be continued against the estate or legal representative of the accused after proper substitution or against said estate, as the case may be. The heirs of the accused may be substituted for the deceased without requiring the appointment of an executor or administrator and the court may appoint a guardian ad litem for the minor heirs.

The court shall forthwith order said legal representative or representatives to appear and be substituted within a period of thirty (30) days from notice.

A final judgment entered in favor of the offended party shall be enforced in the manner especially provided in these rules for prosecuting claims against the estate of the deceased.

If the accused dies before arraignment, the case shall be dismissed without prejudice to any civil action the offended party may file against the estate of the deceased. (n)

Section 5. Judgment in civil action not a bar. — A final judgment rendered in a civil action absolving the defendant from civil liability is not a bar to a criminal action against the defendant for the same act or omission subject of the civil action. (4a)

Section 6. Suspension by reason of prejudicial question. — A petition for suspension of the criminal action based upon the pendency of a prejudicial question in a civil action may be filed in the office of the prosecutor or the court conducting the preliminary investigation. When the criminal action has been filed in court for trial, the petition to suspend shall be filed in the same criminal action at any time before the prosecution rests. (6a)

Section 7. Elements of prejudicial question. — The elements of a prejudicial question are: (a) the previously instituted civil action involves an issue similar or intimately related to the issue raised in the subsequent criminal action, and (b) the resolution of such issue determines whether or not the criminal action may proceed. (5a)

Court May Order Actions to be Consolidated By:

• A joint hearing or trial of any and all matters or issue in the action; or
• Consolidation of all actions; or
• Such order concerning proceedings therein as may tend to avoid unnecessary costs or delay.

Civil cases MAY now be consolidated with criminal cases. (Rule 111, Section 2[a]

Consolidation is a matter of discretion with the court. Consolidation becomes a matter of right only when the cases sought to be consolidated involve similar questions of fact and law, provided certain requirements are met. An essential requisite of consolidation is that the court must have jurisdiction over all the cases consolidated before it. In this case, since the Sandiganbayan does not have jurisdiction over the collection case, the same cannot be consolidated with the criminal cases even if these cases involve similar questions of fact and law. (Republic v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 116463, 2013)

Under the Rules of Court, the consolidation of cases for trial is permissive and a matter of judicial discretion. This is because trials held in the first instance require the attendance of the parties, their respective counsel and their witnesses, a task that surely entails an expense that can multiply if there are several proceedings upon the same issues involving the same parties. At the trial stage, the avoidance of unnecessary expenses and undue vexation to the parties is the primary objective of consolidation of cases.

But the permissiveness of consolidation does not carry over to the appellate stage where the primary objective is less the avoidance of unnecessary expenses and undue vexation than it is the ideal realization of the dual function of all appellate adjudications.

In the appellate stage, the rigid policy is to make the consolidation of all cases and proceedings resting on the same set of facts or involving identical claims or interests or parties mandatory. Such consolidation should be made regardless of whether or not the parties or any of them requests it. (In re: Fabiana, A.M. No. CA-12-51-J, 2013)

Proceedings for the issuance of a writ of possession being ex parte and non-litigious in nature, cannot be consolidated with proceedings seeking to nullify the extra-judicial foreclosure or the certificate of sale. (Espinoza v. UOB, G.R. No. 175380, 2010)

General Rule: Primacy of Criminal Action Over Civil Action

After the filing of the criminal action, the civil action arising therefrom, which has been reserved, cannot be instituted until final judgment has been rendered in the criminal action (Rule 111, Sec. 2).

If the civil action is instituted before the criminal action and the criminal action is subsequently commenced, the pending civil action shall be suspended until final judgment of the criminal action has been rendered (Rule 111, Sec. 2).

Exceptions:

• In cases of independent civil actions based upon Articles 32, 33, 34 and 2176 of the Civil Code (Rule 111, Sec. 3);
• In cases where the civil action presents a prejudicial question; and
• Where the civil action is not one intended to enforce the civil liability arising from the offense.

Note: Article 29 of the Civil Code merely emphasizes that a civil action for damages is not precluded by the acquittal of an accused for the same criminal act or omission. It does not state that the remedy can be availed of only in a separate civil action.

Note: While the criminal action is pending, the running of the period of prescription of the civil action which, either 1) cannot be instituted separately or 2) whose proceeding has been suspended, shall be tolled.

Consolidation of Criminal and Civil Cases Before Judgment on the Merits

Before judgment on the merits is rendered in the civil action, the same may, upon motion of the offended party be consolidated with the criminal action in the court trying the criminal action. This is a modification on the rule on primacy of criminal action (Rule 111, Sec. 1, last paragraph).

Where Effected

The consolidation must be effected in the criminal court, irrespective of the nature of the offense, the amount of the civil claim or the rank of the court trying the civil case.

In cases where consolidation is given due course, the evidence presented and admitted in the civil case shall be deemed automatically reproduced in the criminal action without prejudice to the right of the prosecution to cross-examine the witnesses presented by the offended party in the criminal case and of the parties to present additional evidence.

The consolidated criminal and civil cases shall be tried and decided jointly (Rule 111, Sec. 2).

General Rule: Civil liability is not extinguished by an acquittal where:

• The acquittal is based on reasonable doubt, if the civil case has been reserved.
• The decision contains a declaration that the liability is not criminal but only civil in nature.
• The civil liability is not derived from or based on the criminal act of which the accused is acquitted. (Sapiera v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 128927, 1999).

Exception: If there is a finding in the final judgment in the criminal action that the act or omission from which the civil liability may arise did not exist. (Ching v. Nicdao, G.R. No. 141181, 2007)

Note: The acquittal of petitioner does not bar the offended party from pursuing a subsequent civil case based on the delict, UNLESS, the judgment of acquittal expressly declares that the act or omission from which the civil liability may arise did not exist. (Coscuella v. Sandiganbayan. G.R. No. 191411, 2013)

Note: The acquittal of an accused who is also a respondent in an administrative case does not conclude the administrative proceedings, nor carry with it relief from administrative liability. Only substantial evidence is necessary in administrative cases. (Gupilan-Aguilar v. Office of the Ombudsman, G.R. No. 197307, 2014, see also Dy v. People, G.R. No. 189081, 2016)

Note: The Supreme Court, in Co v. Muñoz (G.R. No. 181986, 2013) ruled that there was no libel committed because Muñoz’s remarks were privileged communication, and since malice was no longer presumed, there was no civil liability on his part.

Criminal liability for estafa is not affected by a compromise or novation of contract, since it is a public offense (Metrobank v. Reynaldo, G.R. No. G.R. No. 164538, 2010)

Requisites

• May be brought by the offended party;
• Shall proceed independently of criminal action;
• and Shall require only a preponderance of evidence. (Rule 111, Sec. 3)

Note: Rule on Double Recovery – An offended party cannot recover damages twice for the same act or omission charged in the criminal action (Rule 111, Sec. 3)

Before Arraignment

The criminal action shall be dismissed without prejudice to the offended party’s filing any civil action against the estate of the deceased (Rule 111, Sec. 4).

Judgment in Civil Action Not A Bar

A final judgment rendered in a civil action absolving the defendant from civil liability is not a bar to a criminal action against the defendant for the same act or omission subject of the civil action (Rule 111, Sec. 5).

NOTE: Where the criminal case was dismissed before trial because the offended party executed an affidavit of desistance, the civil action thereof is similarly dismissed.

Upon accused's death pending appeal of his conviction, the criminal action is extinguished inasmuch as there is no longer a defendant to stand as the accused; the civil action instituted therein for the recovery of the civil liability ex delicto is ipso facto extinguished, grounded as it is on the criminal action. However, it is well to clarify that accused's civil liability in connection with his acts against the victim may be based on sources other than delicts; in which case, the victim may file a separate civil action against the estate of the accused, as may be warranted by law and procedural rules. (People v. Layag, G.R. No. 214875, 2016).

Actual Damages

General Rule: No filing fees are required for amounts of actual damages (Rule 111, Sec. 1).

Exception: Criminal action for violation of B.P. 22 which is deemed to include the corresponding civil action. The offended party shall, upon the filing of the criminal and civil actions, pay in full the filing fees based on the face value of the check as the actual damages.

NOTE: Where a total of 40 counts of violation of B.P. 22 was filed, this is equivalent to the filing of 40 different information, as each count represents an independent violation of the law. Filing fees, are therefore, due for each count. (Chua v. Executive Judge, G.R. No. 202920, 2013).

Purpose of Execution: to prevent offended party from using the prosecutor’s office and the court as vehicles for recovery of the face value of the check, without paying the corresponding filing fees

Private Prosecutor Participation

A public prosecutor may allow a private prosecutor (i.e., a lawyer engaged by the private offended party) to actively handle the conduct of the trial:

• Where the civil action arising from the crime is deemed instituted in the criminal action.
• The Public Prosecutor must be present during the proceedings and must take over the conduct of the trial from the private prosecutor at any time the cause of the prosecution may be adversely affected.

Thus, where the prosecutor has turned over the active conduct of the trial to the private prosecutor who presented testimonial evidence even when the public prosecutor was absent during the trial, the evidence presented could not be considered valid evidence of the People.

Note: This rule applies ONLY to courts, which are provided by law with prosecutors, and not to municipal courts that have no trial prosecutors, in which case the evidence presented by the private prosecutor can be considered as evidence for the People.

The conformity of the public prosecutor is not necessary to give the aggrieved party personality to question an order quashing search warrants (WWW Corp v. People, G.R. No. 161106, 2014)

Compromise on Civil Aspect

The offended party may compromise the civil aspect of a crime, provided that it must be entered before or during the litigation, and not after final judgment. A compromise on the civil aspect is valid even if it turns out to be unsatisfactory either to one or both of the parties.

IMPORTANT: Section 1, Rule 111, Rules of Court now expressly provides that no counterclaim, crossclaim or third-party complaint may be filed by the accused in the criminal case, but any cause of action which could have been subject thereof may be litigated in a separate civil action.