Estherlita Cruz-Agana vs Judge Santiago-Lagman

written by Howard

G.R. NO. 139018 – 495 Phil. 188 – 455 SCRA 20 – Remedial Law – Civil Procedure – Certification of Non-forum Shopping Not Needed in Compulsory Counterclaim 

In 1996, Estherlita Agana filed a complaint for annulment of title against Serrano Enterprises. Said complaint involves a property which is allegedly sold to Serrano Enterprises by means of fraud. Serrano Enterprises filed a counterclaim against Agana. Agana moved to dismiss the counterclaim on the ground that said counterclaim lacks a certification for non-forum shopping. Agana contends that the same is required by A.C. No. 04-94. Eventually, Judge Lagman dismissed the motion of Agana.

ISSUE: Whether or not a compulsory counterclaim requires a certification for non-forum shopping.

HELD: No. A counterclaim is not an initiatory pleading. Administrative Circular No. 04-94 does not apply to compulsory counterclaims.  The circular applies to initiatory and similar pleadings only.  A compulsory counterclaim set up in the answer is not an “initiatory” or similar pleading.  The initiatory pleading is the plaintiff’s (Agana’s) complaint.  A respondent (Serrano Ent.) has no choice but to raise a compulsory counterclaim the moment the plaintiff files the complaint.  Otherwise, respondent waives the compulsory counterclaim. In short, the compulsory counterclaim is a reaction or response, mandatory upon pain of waiver, to an initiatory pleading which is the complaint.

Is the rule the same for permissive counterclaims?

No. If it is a permissive counterclaim, the lack of a certificate of non-forum shopping is fatal.  If it is a compulsory counterclaim, the lack of a certificate of non-forum shopping is immaterial.

Read full text