3. Allegations (Rule 8)

3. Allegations in a Pleading (RULE 8)

a. Manner of making allegations b. Ultimate facts including the evidence c. Alternative causes of action or defenses d. Conditions precedent e. Capacity to sue or be sued f. Fraud, mistake, malice, intent, knowledge and other condition of the mind, judgments, official documents or acts g. Pleading a judgment or decision h. Pleading an actionable document i. Specific denials j. Affirmative defenses in relation to Sec. 5(b), Rule 6 and Sec. 12, Rule 8

Updated: A court may liberally apply the sworn-denial requirement for an actionable document when sworn pleadings put the adverse party on notice that genuineness or due execution is disputed (Asico v. Heirs of See-Pornel, G.R. No. 271635, 27 August 2025).

E. Pleadings (part 2 of 3)

Section 1. In general. – Every pleading shall contain in a methodical and logical form, a plain, concise and direct statement of the ultimate facts, including the evidence on which the party pleading relies for his [or her] claim or defense, as the case may be. If a cause of action [or] defense relied on is based on law, the pertinent provisions thereof and their applicability to him or her shall be clearly and concisely stated. (1a) Section 3. Conditions precedent. – In any pleading, a general averment of the performance or occurrence of all conditions precedent shall be sufficient. (3) Section 4. Capacity. – Facts showing the capacity of a party to sue or be sued or the authority of a party to sue or be sued in a representative capacity or the legal existence of an organized association of persons that is made a party, must be averred. A party desiring to raise an issue as to the legal existence of any party or the capacity of any party to sue or be sued in a representative capacity, shall do so by specific denial, which shall include such supporting particulars as are peculiarly within the pleader’s knowledge. (4) Section 5. Fraud, mistake, condition of the mind. – In all averments of fraud or mistake, the circumstances constituting fraud or mistake must be stated with particularity. Malice, intent, knowledge or other condition of the mind of a person may be averred generally. (5) Section 6. Judgment. – In pleading a judgment or decision of a domestic or foreign court, judicial or quasi-judicial tribunal, or of a board or officer, it is sufficient to aver the judgment or decision without setting forth matter showing jurisdiction to render it. An authenticated copy of the judgment or decision shall be attached to the pleading. (6a) Section 7. Action or defense based on document. – Whenever an action or defense is based upon a written instrument or document, the substance of such instrument or document shall be set forth in the pleading, and the original or a copy thereof shall be attached to the pleading as an exhibit, which shall be deemed to be a part of the pleading. (7a) Section 8. How to contest such documents. – When an action or defense is founded upon a written instrument, or attached to the corresponding pleading as provided in the preceding section, the genuineness and due execution of the instrument shall be deemed admitted unless the adverse party, under oath, specifically denies them, and sets forth what he or she claims to be the facts; but the requirement of an oath does not apply when the adverse party does not appear to be a party to the instrument or when compliance with an order for an inspection of the original instrument is refused. (8a) Section 9. Official document or act. – In pleading an official document or official act, it is sufficient to aver that the document was issued or the act was done in compliance with law. (9) Section 10. Specific denial. – A defendant must specify each material allegation of fact the truth of which he or she does not admit and, whenever practicable, shall set forth the substance of the matters upon which he or she relies to support his or her denial. Where a defendant desires to deny only a part of an averment, he or she shall specify so much of it as is true and material and shall deny only the remainder. Where a defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of a material averment made [to] the complaint, he or she shall so state, and this shall have the effect of a denial. (10a) Section 11. Allegations not specifically denied deemed admitted. – Material averments in a pleading asserting a claim or claims, other than those as to the amount of unliquidated damages, shall be deemed admitted when not specifically denied. (11a) Section 12. Affirmative defenses. – (a) A defendant shall raise his or her affirmative defenses in his or her answer, which shall be limited to the reasons set forth under Section 5(b), Rule 6, and the following grounds:

• That the court has no jurisdiction over the person of the defending party;
• That venue is improperly laid;
• That the plaintiff has no legal capacity to sue;
• That the pleading asserting the claim states no cause of action; and
• That a condition precedent for filing the claim has not been complied with.

(b) Failure to raise the affirmative defenses at the earliest opportunity shall constitute a waiver thereof. (c) The court shall motu proprio resolve the above affirmative defenses within thirty (30) calendar days from the filing of the answer. (d) As to the other affirmative defenses under the first paragraph of Section 5(b), Rule 6, the court may conduct a summary hearing within fifteen (15) calendar days from the filing of the answer. Such affirmative defenses shall be resolved by the court within thirty (30) calendar days from the termination of the summary hearing. (e) Affirmative defenses, if denied, shall not be the subject of a motion for reconsideration or petition for certiorari, prohibition or mandamus, but may be among the matters to be raised on appeal after a judgment on the merits. (n)

Section 13. Striking out of pleading or matter contained therein. – Upon motion made by a party before responding to a pleading or, if no responsive pleading is permitted by these Rules, upon motion made by a party within twenty (20) calendar days after the service of the pleading upon him or her, or upon the court’s own initiative at any time, the court may order any pleading to be stricken out or that any sham or false, redundant, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter be stricken out therefrom. (12a)

RULE 9: EFFECT OF FAILURE TO PLEAD

Section 1. Defenses and objections not pleaded. – Defenses and objections not pleaded either in a motion to dismiss or in the answer are deemed waived. However, when it appears from the pleadings or the evidence on record that the court has no jurisdiction over the subject matter, that there is another action pending between the same parties for the same cause, or that the action is barred by a prior judgment or by statute of limitations, the court shall dismiss the claim. (1) Section 2. Compulsory counterclaim, or cross-claim, not set up barred. – A compulsory counterclaim, or a cross-claim, not set up shall be barred. (2) Section 3. Default; [d]eclaration of. – If the defending party fails to answer within the time allowed therefor, the court shall, upon motion of the claiming party with notice to the defending party, and proof of such failure, declare the defending party in default. Thereupon, the court shall proceed to render judgment granting the claimant such relief as his or her pleading may warrant, unless the court in its discretion requires the claimant to submit evidence. Such reception of evidence may be delegated to the clerk of court. (a) Effect of order of default. – A party in default shall be entitled to notice[s] of subsequent proceedings but shall not to take part in the trial.

(b) Relief from order of default. – A party declared in default may at any time after notice thereof and before judgment, file a motion under oath to set aside the order of default upon proper showing that his or her failure to answer was due to fraud, accident, mistake or excusable negligence and that he or she has a meritorious defense. In such case, the order of default may be set aside on such terms and conditions as the judge may impose in the interest of justice. (c) Effect of partial default. – When a pleading asserting a claim states a common cause of action against several defending parties, some of whom answer and the others fail to do so, the court shall try the case against all upon the answers thus filed and render judgment upon the evidence presented. (d) Extent of relief to be awarded. – A judgment rendered against a party in default shall [neither] exceed the amount or be different in kind from that prayed for nor award unliquidated damages. (e) Where no defaults allowed. – If the defending party in action for annulment or declaration of nullity of marriage or for legal separation fails to answer, the court shall order the Solicitor General or his or her deputized public prosecutor, to investigate whether or not a collusion between the parties exists, and if there is no collusion, to intervene for the State in order to see to it that the evidence submitted is not fabricated. (3a)

RULE 10: AMENDED AND SUPPLEMENTAL PLEADINGS

Section 1. Amendments in general. – Pleadings may be amended by adding or striking out an allegation or the name of any party, or by correcting a mistake in the name of a party or a mistaken or inadequate allegation or description in any other respect, so that the actual merits of the controversy may speedily be determined, without regard to technicalities, in the most expeditious and inexpensive manner. (1a) Section 2. Amendments as a matter of right. – A party may amend his [or her] pleading once as a matter of right at any time before a responsive pleading is served or, in the case of a reply, at any time within ten (10) calendar days after it is served. (2a) Section 3. Amendments by leave of court. – Except as provided in the next preceding [S]ection, substantial amendments may be made only upon leave of court. But such leave shall be refused if it appears to the court that the motion was made with intent to delay [or] confer jurisdiction on the court, or the pleading stated no cause of action from the beginning which could be amended. Orders of the court upon the matters provided in this [S]ection shall be made upon motion filed in court, and after notice to the adverse party, and an opportunity to be heard. (3a) Section 4. Formal amendments. – A defect in the designation of the parties and other clearly clerical or typographical errors may be summarily corrected by the court at any stage of the action, at its initiative or on motion, provided no prejudice is caused thereby to the adverse party. (4) Section 5. No amendment [necessary] to conform to or authorize presentation of evidence. – When issues not raised by the pleadings are tried with the express or implied consent of the parties, they shall be treated in all respects as if they had been raised in the pleadings. No amendment of such pleadings deemed amended is necessary to cause them to conform to the evidence. (5a) Section 6. Supplemental pleadings. – Upon motion of a party[,] the court may, upon reasonable notice and upon such terms as are just, permit him or her to serve a supplemental pleading setting forth transactions, occurrences or events which have happened since the date of the pleading sought to be supplemented. The adverse party may plead thereto within ten (10) calendar days from notice of the order admitting the supplemental pleading. (6a) Section 7. Filing of amended pleadings. – When any pleading is amended, a new copy of the entire pleading, incorporating the amendments, which shall be indicated by appropriate marks, shall be filed. (7) Section 8. Effect of amended pleadings. – An amended pleading supersedes the pleading that it amends. However, admissions in superseded pleadings may be offered in evidence against the pleader, and claims or defenses alleged therein not incorporated in the amended pleading shall be deemed waived. (8a)

RULE 11: WHEN TO FILE RESPONSIVE PLEADINGS

Section 1. Answer to the complaint. – The defendant shall file his or her answer to the complaint within thirty (30) calendar days after service of summons, unless a different period is fixed by the court. (1a) Section 2. Answer of a defendant foreign private juridical entity. – Where the defendant is a foreign private juridical entity and service of summons is made on the government official designated by law to receive the same, the answer shall be filed within sixty (60) calendar days after receipt of summons by such entity. (2a) Section 3. Answer to amended complaint. – [When] the plaintiff files an amended complaint as a matter of right, the defendant shall answer the same within thirty (30) calendar days after being served with a copy thereof. Where its filing is not a matter of right, the defendant shall answer the amended complaint within fifteen (15) calendar days from notice of the order admitting the same. An answer earlier filed may serve as the answer to the amended complaint if no new answer is filed. This Rule shall apply to the answer to an amended counterclaim, amended cross-claim, amended third (fourth, etc.)-party complaint, and amended complaint-in-intervention. (3a) Section 4. Answer to counterclaim or cross-claim. – A counterclaim or cross-claim must be answered within twenty (20) calendar days from service. (4a) Section 5. Answer to third (fourth, etc.)-party complaint. – The time to answer a third (fourth, etc)-party complaint shall be governed by the same rule as the answer to the complaint. (5) Section 6. Reply. – A reply, if allowed under Section 10, Rule 6 hereof, may be filed within fifteen (15) calendar days from service of the pleading responded to. (6a) Section 7. Answer to supplemental complaint. – A supplemental complaint may be answered within twenty (20) calendar days from notice of the order admitting the same, unless a different period is fixed by the court. The answer to the complaint shall serve as the answer to the supplemental complaint if no new or supplemental answer is filed. (7a) Section 8. Existing counterclaim or cross-claim. – A compulsory counterclaim or a cross-claim that a defending party has at the time he or she files his or her answer shall be contained therein. (8a) Section 9. Counterclaim or cross-claim arising after answer. – A counterclaim or a cross-claim which either matured or was acquired by a party after serving his or her pleading may, with the permission of the court, be presented as a counterclaim or a cross-claim by supplemental pleading before judgment. (9a) Section 10. Omitted counterclaim or cross-claim. – When a pleader fails to set up a counterclaim or a cross-claim through oversight, inadvertence, or excusable neglect, or when justice requires, he or she may, by leave of court, set up the counterclaim or cross-claim by amendment before judgment. (10a) Section 11. Extension of time to file an answer. – A defendant may, for meritorious reasons, be granted an additional period of not more than thirty (30) calendar days to file an answer. A defendant is only allowed to file one (1) motion for extension of time to file an answer. A motion for extension to file any pleading, other than an answer, is prohibited and considered a mere scrap of paper. The court, however, may allow any other pleading to be filed after the time fixed by these Rules. (11a)

RULE 13: FILING AND SERVICE OF PLEADINGS, JUDGMENTS AND OTHER PAPERS

Section 1. Coverage. – This Rule shall govern the filing of all pleadings, motions, and other court submissions, as well as the service thereof, except those for which a different mode of service is prescribed. (1a) Section 2. Filing and [s]ervice, defined. – Filing is the act of submitting the pleading or other paper to the court. Service is the act of providing a party with a copy of the pleading or any other court submission. If a party has appeared by counsel, service upon such party shall be made upon his or her counsel, unless service upon the party and the party’s counsel is ordered by the court. Where one counsel appears for several parties, such counsel shall only be entitled to one copy of any paper served upon him by the opposite side. Where several counsels appear for one party, such party shall be entitled to only one copy of any pleading or paper to be served upon the lead counsel if one is designated, or upon any one of them if there is no designation of a lead counsel. (2a) Section 3. Manner of filing. – The filing of pleadings and other court submissions shall be made by:

Updated: A court may apply Rule 8’s sworn-denial requirement liberally when pleadings under oath put the adverse party on notice that the document’s genuineness or due execution is disputed (Asico v. Heirs of See-Pornel, G.R. No. 271635, 27 August 2025).

Principle of Negative Averments

General Rule: Negative allegations need not be proved, whether in a civil or criminal action.

Exception: When such negative allegations are essential parts of the cause of action or defense in a civil case or are essential ingredients of the offense in a criminal case or defenses thereto. (see People v. Yang, G.R. No. 148077, 2004)

In CRIMINAL CASES, if the subject of a negative averment inheres to the offense as an essential ingredient thereof, the prosecution has the burden of proving the same. In view, however, of the difficult office of proving a negative allegation, the prosecution, under such circumstance, needs to do no more than make a prima facie case from the best evidence obtainable. For example, in a case for illegal possession of firearms, the prosecution has to present a certification from the Firearms and Explosives Division of the Philippine National Police that the accused is not licensed to carry a firearm outside of his or her residence. (People v. Quebral, G.R. No. 46094, 1939)

Specific Denial

A specific denial is made by specifying each material allegation of fact, the truth of which the defendant does not admit and, whenever practicable, setting forth the substance of the matters upon which he relies to support his denial. (UA vs. Wallem Philippines Shipping, Inc G.R. No. 171337. July 11, 2012)

The purpose of requiring the defendant to make a specific denial is to make him disclose the matters alleged in the complaint which he succinctly intends to disprove at the trial, together with the matter which he relied upon to support the denial. (Aquintey vs. Tibong, G.R. No. 166704, 2006, see Rule 8, Sec. 10)

Failure to make a specific denial will be considered an admission of that particular allegation in the complaint. (Rule 8, Sec. 11)

Under Rule 8, Sec.10, there are three modes of specific denial:

• by specifying each material allegation of the fact in the complaint, the truth of which the defendant does not admit, and whenever practicable, setting forth the substance of the matters which he will rely upon to support his denial;
• by specifying so much of an averment in the complaint as is true and material and denying only the remainder
• by stating that the defendant is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of a material averment in the complaint, which has the effect of a denial. (Republic v. Gimenez, G.R. No. 174673, January 11, 2016, ponencia by J. Leonen)

Denial Amounting to Admissions: General Denial

A general denial is one which puts in issue all the material averments of the complaint or petition and permits the defendant to prove any and all facts which tend to negate those averments or some or all of them. (Loyola vs. House of Representatives Electoral Tribunal, G.R. No. 109026, 1994)

A general denial does not become specific by the use of the word "specifically." When matters of whether the defendant alleges having no knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief are plainly and necessarily within the defendant’s knowledge, an alleged "ignorance or lack of information" will not be considered as a specific denial. (Republic v. Gimenez, G.R. No. 174673, January 11, 2016, ponencia by J. Leonen)

Q: This case involves a dispute over a certain condominium unit. Both X and Y had prior marriages, and met and married after their respective spouses died. Y purchased the subject property before her marriage to X. The two then executed an Ante-Nuptial Agreement which stated that their properties would be governed by complete separation of properties. Y died, and her children from her previous marriage, collectively Z, are claiming the subject property as their own, while X claims that he bought the property using his own funds and thus has a claim over it. The RTC set a preliminary hearing, however X failed to appear. X is now alleging that Z’s defense of waiver is an issue involving evidentiary matters requiring a full-blown trial on the merits. Is X correct?

A: NO. X cannot now use his own act of not appearing and presenting evidence in the preliminary hearing as a basis to argue that he was deprived the opportunity to produce evidence. He had every opportunity to do so during the preliminary hearing, and it was his own decision not to attend it. Further, with respect to the existence, genuineness, and due execution of the Ante-Nuptial Agreement, no further evidence is needed to establish the same. Under Rule 8, Section 7 of the Rules of Court, whenever a defense is based upon a written instrument or document, the substance of such instrument shall be set forth in the pleading and the original or copy thereof shall be attached to the pleading, which shall be deemed part of the pleading. According to the succeeding section, the genuineness and due execution of the instrument shall be deemed admitted unless the adverse party, under oath specifically denies them, and sets forth what he claims to be the facts. In the instant case, it is not disputed that X failed to specifically deny under oath the genuineness and due execution of the Ante-Nuptial Agreement. In fact, the existence of the Ante-Nuptial Agreement was never questioned nor denied by X. (Delgado v. GQ Realty Development Corp., G.R. No. 241774. September 25, 2019)

Q: X filed a complaint for illegal dismissal against A, alleging to be A’s employee and was terminated due to old age. A asserted that X was not its employee but an employee of its operation supervisor, that X violated company policy and that the disallowance to enter the slaughterhouse was not an act of dismissal. During the trial, A failed to specifically deny that X was informed he could no longer report for work on the specific date of termination. In the affidavit of the employee who has the authority to discipline A mentioned instances where X was barred from entering but did not specifically state that he was barred on the specific date of termination. Did A admit that X was terminated?

A: Yes. By their silence, petitioners are deemed to have admitted the same. Section 11 of Rule 8 of the rules of Court, which supplements the NLRC Rules, provides that an allegation not specifically denied is deemed admitted (Masonic Contractor, Inc. v. Madjos, G.R. No. 185094, Nov. 25, 2009). In this case, A failed to specifically deny that X was informed he could no longer report for work on the specific date of termination. In the affidavit of the employee who has the authority to discipline A mentioned instances where X was barred from entering but did not specifically state that he was barred on the specific date of termination. Hence, there was an admission of X’s termination.

Updated: A failure to specifically deny an actionable document under oath generally admits its genuineness and due execution, but sworn pleadings that give adequate notice of the dispute may warrant liberal application of the rule (Asico v. Heirs of See-Pornel, G.R. No. 271635, 27 August 2025).

Lack of supporting Affidavits is NOT a ground for dismissal of the petition

This requirement, however, should not be read as an absolute one that necessarily leads to the dismissal of the petition if not strictly followed. Where, the petitioner has substantially complied with the requirement by submitting a verified petition sufficiently detailing the facts relied upon, the strict need for the sworn statement that an affidavit represents is essentially fulfilled. The failure to attach the required affidavits was fully cured when the respondent and her witness (Mrs. Talbin) personally testified in the CA hearings held on January 7 and 17 and February 18, 2008 to swear to and flesh out the allegations of the petition. Thus, even on this point, the petition cannot be faulted. (Razon v. Tagitis, G.R. No. 184298, 2009)

Filing of a Reply is NOT Allowed, EXCEPT:

• When the defense in the answer is based upon an actionable document (Rule 8, Sec. 7); or
• To set up affirmative defenses on the counterclaim.

Thus, where the defense in the Answer is based on an actionable document, a Reply specifically denying it under oath must be made; otherwise, the genuineness and due execution of the document will be deemed admitted. (Casent Realty v. Philbanking, G.R. No. 150731, 2007)

MANNER OF MAKING ALLEGATIONS

The pleading must contain only ULTIMATE FACTS, which refer to the essential facts of the claim. It must omit the statement of mere evidentiary facts. The ULTIMATE FACTS are the important and substantial facts which form the basis of the primary right of the plaintiff and which make up the wrongful act or omission of the defendant. If the ultimate facts are not alleged, the cause of action would be insufficient (Riano, Civil Procedure: A Restatement for the bar, 2nd ed, 2009) See: Revised Rules on Civil Procedure

Facts that May be Averred Generally

• Conditions precedent (BUT there must still be an allegation that the specific condition precedent has been complied with); (Sec. 3)
• Capacity to sue or be sued; (Sec. 4)
• Capacity to sue or be sued in a representative capacity; (Sec. 4)
• Legal existence of an organization; (Sec. 4)
• A party desiring to raise an issue as to the legal existence or capacity of any party to sue or be sued in a representative capacity shall do so by SPECIFIC DENIAL which shall include supporting particulars within the pleader’s knowledge;
• Malice, intent, knowledge, or other condition of the mind; (Sec. 5)
• Judgments of domestic or foreign courts, tribunals, boards, or officers (no need to show jurisdiction); and (Sec. 6)
• Official document or act. (Sec. 9)

Pleading an Actionable Document: The Pleader Must

• Set forth in the pleading the substance of the instrument or the document, and to attach the original or the copy of the document to the pleading as an exhibit and which shall form part of the pleading; or
• Set forth in the pleading said copy of the instrument or document (Rule 8, Sec. 7)

Types of Specific Denials:

• Absolute denial – The defendant specifies each material allegation of fact the truth of which he does not admit and, whenever practicable, sets forth the substance of the matters upon which he relies to support his denial. (Rule 8, Section 10)
• Partial denial – The defendant specifies the part of truth of which he admits and denies only the remainder.

Denial by disavowal of knowledge – The defendant alleges that he is without knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of a material averment made in the complaint. This must be made sincerely and in good faith.

In a case where a copy of the mortgage deed is attached to the complaint, it is error for the defendants, in their answer, to deny the underlying debt by saying that they “are without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of the material averments.” Since a copy of the deed was given to the defendants, it was within their power to thoroughly attack the complaint on the basis of more specific denials, rather than a general denial claiming lack of knowledge as to the truth.

The rule, which specifically authorizes an answer of the defendant that he has no knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief to the truth of an averment and which would have an effect of a denial, does not apply where the fact as to which want of knowledge is asserted is to the knowledge of the court as plainly and necessarily within the defendant’s knowledge that his averment of ignorance must be palpably untrue. (Warner Barnes v. Reyes, G.R. No. L-9531, 1958)

Where an answer states that the defendants “specifically deny the allegations in pars. 2 and 3 of the complaint for want of knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth thereof, the truth of the matter being those alleged in the special and affirmative defenses of the defendants...," this is considered a valid denial, as the explanation is said to be provided for in the affirmative and special defenses. (Gaza v. Lim, G.R. No. 126863, 2003)

The purpose of requiring the defendant to make a specific denial is to make him disclose the matters alleged in the complaint which he succinctly intends to disprove at the trial, together with the matter which he relied upon to support the denial. The parties are compelled to lay their cards on the table. Petitioner only asserted that respondent failed to show evidence of its supposed remaining liability. This is not an assertion of the truth and substance of the matter. It is merely a statement that as far as petitioner is concerned, respondent does not have evidence to prove its claim. (Frilou Construction, Inc. v Aegis Integrated Structure Corp., G.R. No. 191088, 2016)