Actions

Far East Bank v. Spouses Plaza (2003)

Ang obtained a loan from the bank, secured by a mortgage over the lot of the Sps Plaza.
He obtained other loans subsequently. When he failed to pay, the bank commenced
foreclosure proceedings. Spouses Plaza offered to pay the first loan. The Bank refused.
Spouses Plaza sued for the release of the mortgage. Bank: MTD for non-payment of
docket fees based on the estimated value of the real property involved, suit was a real
action. SC: Personal one, it doesnt involve any question about the title/possession of the
real property.

Doctrine:
An action to compel the mortgagee to accept payment and for the consequent
cancellation of a real estate mortgage is a personal action if the mortgagee has not
foreclosed the mortgage and the mortgagor is in possession of the premises since
neither the mortgagor's title to nor possession of the property is in question.

Payment of Docket Fees

Ballatan v. CA (1999)
After Ballatan filed a complaint for recovery of possession against them for encroaching
upon her land, respondents Go filed third-party complaints for damages against the
surveyor and their neighbor who also encroached upon their lot. TC: Dismissed. CA:
Awarded damages prayed for. SC: Complaints were praying for attorneys fees, which
are in the nature of unspecified claims arising after the filing of the complaint. Thus,
their docket and filing fees need not have been paid upon filing of the complaint, since
they constitute a lien on the judgment award.

GR: When an action is filed in court, the complaint must be accompanied by the payment
of the requisite docket and filing fees [In real actions based on the value of the
property and amount of damages claimed].
Complaint is filed but fees not paid at the time of filing Court acquires
jurisdiction upon full payment of the fees within a reasonable time as the court
may grant, barring prescription.
Fees prescribed for the real action paid but the fees of certain related damages
are not Court may acquire jurisdiction over the real action, but not over the
accompanying claim for damages. Court may expunge those claims for damages.
Court may also allow, on motion, a reasonable time for amendment of the
complaint to allege the precise amount of damages and accept payment of the
requisite legal fees.
Unspecified claims [determination of which may arise after the filing of the
complaint or similar pleading] additional filing fee shall constitute a lien on the
judgment award. no need to pay upon filing of complaint
Rules also apply to third-party claims and other similar pleadings.
Heirs of the late Reinoso Sr. v. CA (2011)
Complaint for damages was filed because of the collision of a jeep and a truck that
resulted to the death of Reinoso, a passenger of the jeepney. RTC: ifo of petitioners. CA:
Reversed, petitioners didnt pay appropriate docket fee. SC: Apply Manchester doctrine,
relax non-payment rule.

GR: Payment in full of the docket fees within the prescribed period is mandatory.
Manchester: Where the initiatory pleading is not accompanied by the payment of the
docket fee, the court may allow payment of the fee within a reasonable period of time,
but in no case beyond the applicable prescriptive or reglementary period. Same case
applies where the party does not deliberately intend to defraud the court in payment of
docket fees, and manifests its willingness to abide by the rules by paying additional
docket fees when required by the court.

Fedman Devt Corp. v. Agcaoili (2011)

Agcaoili purchased a condo unit of FDC under a CTS. FDC later disconnected his electric
supply for failure to pay dues, which prompted Agcaoili to file a suit for actual, moral,
exemplary damages and attys fees in RTC. Only the amount of actual damages was
specified so the paid assessed docket fees later turned out to be deficient. FDC: RTC no
jurisdiction because of the failure to pay the correct amount of docket fees. SC: RTC has
jurisdiction since Agcaoili paid docket fees. He must pay deficiency though.

GR: No payment of prescribed docket fees, no jurisdiction.

BUT where the plaintiff has paid the amount of filing fees assessed by the clerk of court,
and the amount paid turns out to be deficient, the trial court still acquires jurisdiction
over the case, subject to the payment by the plaintiff of the deficiency assessment.

Ruby Shelter Builders and Realty Devt Corp. v. Formaran (2009)

RSB obtained, and subsequently failed to pay, a loan from Tan & Obiedo secured by a
REM over 5 parcels of land. Tan & Obiedo, pursuant to a MOA, executed Deeds of
Absolute Sale in their names and secured TCTs from the Registry of Deeds. RSB filed a
complaint for declaration of nullity of the deeds and damages, paying P13.6k in docket
fees because the Clerk of Court initially considered the case to be one incapable of
pecuniary estimation. RTC: Pay additional P700k docket fees. CA: Affirmed. SC: RTC
correct. Although the complaint is denominated as an action for nullity, it is in reality an
action in rem for which additional docket fees must be paid. Action for annulment of sale
and claim for damages are closely intertwined with the issue of ownership of property
considered immovable, the recovery of which was RSB's primary objective.

The court acquires jurisdiction over any case only upon the payment of the prescribed
docket fee. Hence, the payment of docket fees is not only mandatory, but also
jurisdictional. In order to resolve the issue of the correct amount of docket fees is paid, it
is necessary to determine the true nature of the complaint. The nature of an action is
determined by the allegations in the body of the pleading or complaint itself, rather than
by its title or heading. It may be necessary to take into account significant facts and
circumstances beyond the complaint to determine its nature.

GSIS v. Heirs of Caballero (2010)

THE SUPREME COURT NOW HAS THE SOLE AUTHORITY TO PROMULGATE RULES
CONCERNING PLEADING, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE IN ALL COURTS.