1
(3) The above principles have been consistently applied. Thus, in a
EXECUTION, SATISFACTION AND EFFECT OF JUDGMENTS
(Rule 39)
Difference between finality of judgment for purpose of appeal; for
purposes of execution
(1) The term final when used to describe a judgment may be used in two
senses. In the first, it refers to a judgment that disposes of a case in a
manner that leaves nothing more to be done by the court in respect thereto.
In this sense, a final judgment is distinguished from an interlocutory order
which does not finally terminate or dispose of the case (Rudecon
Management Corp. vs. Singson, 455 SCRA 612). Since the finality of a
judgment has the effect of ending the litigation, an aggrieved party may
then appeal from the judgment. Under Sec. 1, Rule 41, an appeal may be
taken from a judgment or final order that completely disposes of the case.
Under the same rule, an appeal cannot be taken from an interlocutory
order.
(2) In another sense, the word final may refer to a judgment that is no
longer appealable and is already capable of being executed because the
period for appeal has elapsed without a party having perfected an appeal or
if there has been appeal, it has already been resolved by a highest possible
tribunal (PCGG vs. Sandiganbayan, 455 SCRA 526). In this sense, the
judgment is commonly referred to as one that is final and executory.
When execution shall issue; Execution as a matter of right (Sec. 1)
(1) When a judgment becomes final and executory, all the issues between
the parties are deemed resolved and laid to rest. All that remains is the
execution of the decision which is a matter of right. However, the Court
enumerates the instances where a writ of execution may be appealed, one
of which is when there has been a change in the situation of the parties
making execution inequitable or unjust. Also, Sec. 5, Rule 135 of the Rules
of Court states that it is an inherent power of a court to amend and control
its process and orders so as to make them conformable to law and justice
(Parel v. heirs of Simeon Prdencio, GR No. 192217, 03/02/2011).
(2) Execution is a matter of right upon the expiration of the period to appeal
and no appeal was perfected from a judgment or order that disposes of the
action or proceeding (Sec. 1, Rule 39). Once a judgment becomes final and
executory, the prevailing party can have it executed as a matter of right,
and the issuance of a writ of execution becomes the ministerial duty of the
court. Once a decision becomes final and executory, it is the ministerial
duty of the presiding judge to issue a writ of execution except in certain
cases, as when subsequent events would render execution of judgment
unjust (Mangahas vs. Paredes, GR 157866, Feb. 14, 2007).
subsequent ruling the Court declared: Once a judgment becomes final, it is
basic that the prevailing party is entitled as a matter of right to a writ of
execution the issuance of which is the trial courts ministerial duty,
compellable by mandamus (Greater Metropolitan Manila Solid Waste
Management Committee vs. Jancom Environmental Corp., GR 2163663,
Jan. 30, 2006).
(4) Judgments and orders become final and executory by operation of law
and not by judicial declaration. The trial court need not even pronounce the
finality of the order as the same becomes final by operation of law. Its
finality becomes a fact when the reglementary period for appeal lapses, and
no appeal is perfected within such period (Testate of Maria Manuel Vda. De
Biascan, 374 SCRA 621; Vlason Enterprises vs. CA, 310 SCRA 26).
(5) Execution is a matter or right after expiration of period to appeal and no
appeal is perfected, except in the following cases:
(a) Where judgment turns out to be incomplete or conditional;
(b) Judgment is novated by the parties;
(c) Equitable grounds (i.e., change in the situation of the parties
supervening fact doctrine)
(d) Execution is enjoined (i.e., petition for relief from judgment or
annulment of judgment with TRO or writ of preliminary injunction);
(e) Judgment has become dormant; or
(f) Execution is unjust or impossible.
Discretionary execution (Sec. 2)
(1) The concept of discretionary execution constitutes an exception to the
general rule that a judgment cannot be executed before the lapse of the
period for appeal or during the pendency of an appeal. Under Sec. 1, Rule
39, execution shall issue only as a matter of right upon a judgment or final
order that finally disposes of the action or proceeding upon the execution of
the period to appeal therefrom if no appeal has been duly perfected.
(2) A discretionary execution is called discretionary precisely because it is
not a matter of right. The execution of a judgment under this concept is
addressed to the discretionary power of the court (Bangkok Bank Public
Company Ltd. vs. Lee, GR 159806, Jan. 29, 2006). Unlike judgments that
are final and executor, a judgment subject to discretionary execution cannot
be insisted upon but simply prayed and hoped for because a discretionary
execution is not a matter of right.
(3) A discretionary execution like an execution pending appeal must be
strictly construed because it is an exception to the general rule. It is not
meant to be availed of routinely because it applies only in extraordinary
circumstances. It should be interpreted only insofar as the language thereof
fairly warrants, and all doubts should be resolved in favor of the general rule

(Planters Products, Inc. vs. CA, GR 106052, Oct. 22, 1999). Where the
execution is not in conformity with the rules, the execution is null and void
(Bangkok Bank vs. Lee, supra.).
(4) Requisites for discretionary execution:
(a) There must be a motion filed by the prevailing party with notice to the
adverse party;
(b) There must be a hearing of the motion for discretionary execution;
(c) There must be good reasons to justify the discretionary execution;
and
(d) The good reasons must be stated in a special order (Sec. 2, Rule
39).
(5) The execution of a judgment pending appeal is an exception to the
general rule that only a final judgment may be executed; hence, under
Section 2, Rule 39 of the Rules of Court (Rules), the existence of "good
reasons" for the immediate execution of a judgment is an indispensable
requirement as this is what confers discretionary power on a court to issue
a writ of execution pending appeal. Good reasons consist of compelling
circumstances justifying immediate execution, lest judgment becomes
illusory, that is, the prevailing partys chances for recovery on execution
from the judgment debtor are altogether nullified. The "good reason"
yardstick imports a superior circumstance demanding urgency that will
outweigh injury or damage to the adverse party and one such "good
reason" that has been held to justify discretionary execution is the imminent
danger of insolvency of the defeated party. The factual findings that NSSC
is under a state of rehabilitation and had ceased business operations, taken
together with the information that NSSC President and General Manager
Orimaco had permanently left the country with his family, constitute such
superior circumstances that demand urgency in the execution of the
October 31, 2007 Decision because respondents now run the risk of its
non-satisfaction by the time the appeal is decided with finality. (Centennial
Guarantee Assurance Corporation v. Universal Motors Corporation, GR No.
189358, 10/082014).
How a judgment is executed (Sec. 4)
(1) Judgments in actions for injunction, receivership, accounting and
support, and such other judgments as are now or may hereafter be
declared to be immediately executory, shall be enforceable after their
rendition and shall not be stayed by an appeal taken therefrom, unless
otherwise ordered by the trial court. On appeal therefrom, the appellate
court in its discretion may make an order suspending, modifying, restoring
or granting the injunction, receivership, accounting, or award of support.
The stay of execution shall be upon such terms as to bond or otherwise as
may be considered proper for the security or protection of the rights of the
adverse party.
2
(2) Judgments that may be altered or modified after becoming final and
executory:
(a) Facts and circumstances transpire which render its execution
impossible or unjust;
(b) Support;
(c) Interlocutory judgment.
Execution by motion or by independent action (Sec. 6)
(1) A final and executory judgment or order may be executed on motion
within 5 years from the date of its entry. After the lapse of such time, and
before it is barred by the statute of limitations, a judgment may be enforced
by action. The revived judgment may also be enforced by motion within 5
years from the date of its entry and thereafter by action before it is barred
by the statute of limitations.
(2) File for revival of judgment within ten (10) years after finality of judgment
which is a new and separate action filed with the RTC.
By motion Within 5 years
By revival of judgment Within 10 years from date of entry
(3) A judgment unenforced within 10 years after its finality shall be barred.
However an exception is when a registered owner of land cannot invoke the
protection accorded by the Statute of Limitations when he derived his right
from misrepresentation. (Campit v. Gripa, GR No. 195443, 09/17/2014).
(4) 2003 Bar: A filed with the Metropolitan Trial Court (MTC) of Manila an
action for specific performance against B, a resident of Quezon City, to
compel the latter to execute a deed of conveyance covering a parcel of land
situated in Quezon City having an assessed value of P19,000. B received
the summons and a copy of the Complaint on 02 January 2003. On January
2003, B filed a motion to dismiss the complaint on the ground of lack of
jurisdiction contending that the subject matter of the suit was incapable of
pecuniary estimation. The court denied the motion. In due time, B filed with
the RTC a petition for certiorari praying that the said Order be set aside
because the MTC had no jurisdiction over the case.
On 13 February 2003, A filed with the MTC a motion to declare B in default.
The motion was opposed by B on the ground that his Petition for Certiorari
was still pending. (6%)
a. Was the denial of the Motion to Dismiss the Complaint correct?
b. Resolve the Motion to Declare the Defendant in Default.
Answer: The denial of the Motion to Dismiss the Complaint was not correct.
Although the assessed value of the parcel of land involved was P19,000,
within the jurisdiction of the MTC of Manila, the action filed by A for Specific
Performance against B to compel the latter to execute a Deed of

Conveyance of said parcel of land was not capable of pecuniary estimation
and, therefore, the action was within the jurisdiction of the RTC (Copioso v.
Copioso, GR No. 149243, 10/282002).
(5) 2007 Bar: A filed a case against B. While awaiting decision on the case,
A goes to the United States to work. Upon her return to the Philippines
seven years later, A discovered that a decision was rendered by the court in
her favor a few months after she had left. Can A file a motion for execution
of the judgment? Reason briefly. (5%)
Answer: No, A cannot file a motion for execution of the judgment seven
years after the entry of the judgment. She can only do that within five (5)
years from entry of judgment. However, she can file a case for revival of the
judgment, which can be done before it is barred by the statute of limitations
(Rule 39, Section 6) which is within ten (10) years from the date of finality of
the judgment (Macias v. Lim, GR No. 139284, 06/04/2004).
Issuance and contents of a writ of execution (Sec. 8)
(1) The writ of execution shall: (i) issue in the name of the Republic of the
Philippines from the court which granted the motion; (ii) state the name of
the court, the case number and title, the dispositive part of the subject
judgment or order; and (iii) require the sheriff or other proper officer to
whom it is directed to enforce the writ according to its term, in the manner
hereinafter provided:
(a) If the execution be against the property of the judgment obligor, to
satisfy the judgment, with interest, out of the real or personal property of
such judgment obligor;
(b) If it be against real or personal property in the hands of personal
representatives, heirs, devisees, legatees, tenants, or trustees of the
judgment obligor, to satisfy the judgment, with interest, out of such property;
(c) If it be for the sale of real or personal property, to sell such property,
describing it, and apply the proceeds in conformity with the judgment, the
material parts of which shall be recited in the writ of execution;
(d) If it be for the delivery of the possession of real or personal property, to
deliver the possession of the same, describing it, to the party entitled
thereto, and to satisfy any costs, damages, rents, or profits covered by the
judgment out of the personal property of the person against whom it was
rendered, and if sufficient personal property cannot be found, then out of
the real property; and
(e) In all cases, the writ of execution shall specifically state the amount of
the interest, costs, damages, rents, or profits due as of the date of the
issuance of the writ, aside from the principal obligation under the judgment.
For this purpose, the motion for execution shall specify the amounts of the
foregoing reliefs sought by the movants.
(2) 2005 Bar: A obtained a money judgment against B. after the finality of
the decision, the court issued a writ of execution for the enforcement
thereof. Conformably with the said writ, the sheriff levied upon certain
3
properties under Bs name. C filed a third-party claim over said properties
claiming that B had already transferred the same to him.
A moved to deny the third-party claim and to hold B and C jointly and
severally liable to him for the money judgment alleging that B had
transferred said properties to C to defraud him (A).
After due hearing, the court denied the third-party claim and rendered an
amended decision declaring B and C jointly and severally liable to A for the
money judgment. (4%)
Answer: No, C has not been properly impleaded as a party defendant. He
cannot be held liable for damages against A without a trial. In fact, since no
bond was filed by B, the sheriff is liable to C for damages. C can file a
separate action to enforce his third-party claim. It is in that suit that B can
properly raise the ground of fraud against C. However, the execution may
proceed where there is a finding that the claim is fraudulent (Tanongan v.
Samson, 382 SCRA 130 [2002]). Besides, judgment is already final.
Execution of judgment for money (Sec. 9)
(1) In executing a judgment for money, the sheriff shall follow the following
steps:
(a) Demand from the judgment obligor the immediate payment of the full
amount stated in the judgment including the lawful fees in cash, certified
check payable to the judgment obligee or any other form of payment
acceptable to him (Sec. 9). In emphasizing this rule, the SC held that in
the execution of a money judgment, the sheriff is required to first make a
demand on the obligor for the immediate payment of the full amount
stated in the writ of execution (Sibulo vs. San Jose, 474 SCRA 464).
(b) If the judgment obligor cannot pay all or part of the obligation in cash,
certified check or other mode of payment, the officer shall levy upon the
properties of the judgment obligor. The judgment obligor shall have the
option to choose which property or part thereof may be levied upon. If the
judgment obligor does not exercise the option, the officer shall first levy
on the personal properties, if any, and then on the real properties if the
personal properties are insufficient to answer for the personal judgment
but the sheriff shall sell only so much of the property that is sufficient to
satisfy the judgment and lawful fees (Sec. 9[b]).
(2) The sheriff should demand from the judgment obligor the immediate
payment in cash, certified bank check or any other mode of payment
acceptable to the judgment obligee. If the judgment obligor cannot pay by
these methods immediately or at once, he can exercise his option to
choose which of his property can be levied upon. If he does not exercise
this option immediately or when he is absent or cannot be located, he
waives such right, and the sheriff can now first levy his personal properties,
if any, and then the real properties if the personal properties are insufficient

to answer for the judgment. (Quicho v. Reyes, AM No. P-14-3246,
10/15/2014).
Execution of judgment for specific acts (Sec. 10)
(1) If the judgment requires a person to perform a specific act, said act must
be performed but if the party fails to comply within the specified time, the
court may direct the act to be done by someone at the cost of the
disobedient party and the act when so done shall have the effect as if done
by the party (Sec 10[a]). If the judgment directs a conveyance of real or
personal property, and said property is in the Philippines, the court in lieu of
directing the conveyance thereof, may by an order divest the title of any
party and vest it in others, which shall have the force and effect of a
conveyance executed in due form of law (Sec. 10[a], Rule 39).
(2) 2002 Bar: The trial court rendered judgment ordering the defendant to
pay the plaintiff moral and exemplary damages. The judgment was served
on the plaintiff on October 1, 2001, and on the defendant on October 5,
2001. On October 8, 2001, the defendant filed a notice of appeal from the
judgment, but the following day, October 9, 2001, the plaintiff moved for the
execution of the judgment pending appeal. The trial court granted the
motion upon the posting by the plaintiff of a bond to indemnify the
defendant for damages it may suffer as a result of the execution. The court
gave as a special reason for its order the imminent insolvency of the
defendant. Is the order of execution pending appeal correct? Why? (5%)
Answer: No, because awards for moral and exemplary damages cannot be
the subject of execution pending appeal. The execution of any award for
moral and exemplary damages is dependent on the outcome of the main
case. Liabilities for moral and exemplary damages, as well as the exact
amounts remain uncertain and indefinite pending resolution by the Court of
Appeals or Supreme Court (RCPI v. Lantin, 134 SCRA 395 [1985];
International School, Inc. v. Court of Appeals, 309 SCRA 474 [1999]).
Execution of special judgments (Sec. 11)
(1) When a judgment requires the performance of any act other than those
mentioned in the two preceding sections, a certified copy of the judgment
shall be attached to the writ of execution and shall be served by the officer
upon the party against whom the same is rendered, or upon any other
person required thereby, or by law, to obey the same, and such party or
person may be punished for contempt if he disobeys such judgment.
(2) 2001 Bar: An amicable settlement was signed before a Lupon
Tagapamayapa on January 3, 2001. On July 6, 2001, the prevailing party
asked the Lupon to execute the amicable settlement because of the non-
compliance of the other party with the terms of the agreement. The Lupon
concerned refused to execute the settlement/agreement. Is the Lupon
correct in refusing to execute the settlement/agreement. (3%)
4
What should be the course of action of the prevailing party in such a case?
(2%)
Answer: Yes, the Lupon is correct in refusing to execute the
settlement/agreement because the execution sought is already beyond the
period of six months from the date of the settlement within which the Lupon
is authorized to execute (Sec. 417, Local Government Code). After the six-
month period, the prevailing party should move to execute the
settlement/agreement in the appropriate city or municipal court.
Effect of levy on third persons (Sec. 12)
(1) The levy on execution shall create a lien in favor of the judgment obligee
over the right, title and interest of the judgment obligor in such property at
the time of the levy, subject to liens and encumbrances then existing.
Properties exempt from execution (Sec. 13)
(1) There are certain properties exempt from execution enumerated under
Sec. 13, Rule 39:
(a) The judgment obligors family home as provided by law, or the
homestead in which he resides, and the land necessarily used in
connection therewith;
(b) Ordinary tools and implements personally used by him in his trade,
employment, or livelihood;
(c) Three horses, or three cows, or three carabaos, or other beasts of
burden, such as the judgment obligor may select necessarily used by him
in his ordinary occupation;
(d) His necessary clothing and articles for ordinary personal use, excluding
jewelry;
(e) Household furniture and utensils necessary for housekeeping, and
used for that purpose by the judgment obligor and his family, such as the
judgment obligor may select, of a value not exceeding 100,000 pesos.
(f) Provisions for individual or family use sufficient for four months;
(g) The professional libraries and equipment of judges, lawyers,
physicians, pharmacists, dentists, engineers, surveyors, clergymen,
teachers, and other professionals, not exceeding 300,000 pesos;
(h) One fishing boat and accessories not exceeding the total value of
100,000 pesos owned by a fisherman and by the lawful use of which he
earns his livelihood;
(i) So much of the salaries, wages, or earnings of the judgment obligor for
his personal services with 4 months preceding the levy as are necessary
for the support of his family;
(j) Lettered gravestones;
(k) Monies, benefits, privileges, or annuities accruing or in any manner
growing out of any life insurance;
(l) The right to receive legal support, or money or property obtained as
such support, or any pension or gratuity from the government; and

(m) Properties specially exempted by law (Sec. 13, Rule 39).
(2) If the property mentioned in Sec. 13 is the subject of execution because
of a judgment for the recovery of the price or upon judgment of foreclosure
of a mortgage upon the property, the property is not exempt from execution.
Sections 15 - 34 Sale
Sections 35 - 43 How to satisfy judgment
Sections 44 - 45 Meaning of satisfaction of judgment
Proceedings where property is claimed by third persons (Sec. 16)
(1) If the property levied on is claimed by any person other than the
judgment obligor or his agent, and such person makes an affidavit of his
title thereto or right to the possession thereof, stating the grounds of such
right or title, and serves the same upon the officer making the levy and a
copy thereof upon the judgment obligee, the officer shall not be bound to
keep the property, unless such judgment obligee, on demand of the officer,
files a bond approved by the court to indemnify the third-party claimant in a
sum not less than the value of the property levied on. In case of
disagreement as to such value, the same shall be determined by the court
issuing the writ of execution. No claim for damages for the taking or keeping
of the property may be enforced against the bond unless the action therefor
is filed within one hundred twenty (120) days from the date of the filing of
the bond.
The officer shall not be liable for damages for the taking or keeping of the
property, to any third-party claimant if such bond is filed. Nothing herein
contained shall prevent such claimant or any third person from vindicating
his claim to the property in a separate action, or prevent the judgment
obligee from claiming damages in the same or a separate action against a
third-party claimant who filed a frivolous or plainly spurious claim.
When the writ of execution is issued in favor of the Republic of the
Philippines, or any officer duly representing it, the filing of such bond shall
not be required, and in case the sheriff or levying officer is sued for
damages as a result of the levy, he shall be represented by the Solicitor
General and if held liable therefor, the actual damages adjudged by the
court shall be paid by the National Treasurer out of such funds as may be
appropriated for the purpose.
(2) Requisites for a claim by a third person (Relate with Rule 57, Sec. 14,
and Rule 60, Sec. 7):
(a) The property is levied;
(b) The claimant is a person other than the judgment obligor or his agent;
(c) Makes an affidavit of his title thereto or right to the possession thereof
stating the grounds of such right or title; and
(d) Serves the same upon the officer making the levy and the judgment
obligee.
5
In relation to third party claim in attachment and replevin
(1) Certain remedies available to a third person not party to the
action but whose property is the subject of execution:
(a) Terceria - By making an affidavit of his title thereto or his right to
possession thereof, stating the grounds of such right or title. The
affidavit must be served upon the sheriff and the attaching party
(Sec. 14, Rule 57). Upon service of the affidavit upon him, the sheriff
shall not be bound to keep the property under attachment except if
the attaching party files a bond approved by the court. the sheriff
shall not be liable for damages for the taking or keeping of the
property, if such bond shall be filed.
(b) Exclusion or release of property Upon application of the third
person through a motion to set aside the levy on attachment, the
court shall order a summary hearing for the purpose of determining
whether the sheriff has acted rightly or wrongly in the performance of
his duties in the execution of the writ of attachment. The court may
order the sheriff to release the property from the erroneous levy and
to return the same to the third person. In resolving the application,
the court cannot pass upon the question of title to the property with
any character of finality but only insofar as may be necessary to
decide if the sheriff has acted correctly or not (Ching vs. CA, 423
SCRA 356).
(c) Accion Reinvindicatoria - The third party claimant is not
precluded by Sec. 14, Rule 57 from vindicating his claim to the
property in the same or in a separate action. He may file a separate
action to nullify the levy with damages resulting from the unlawful
levy and seizure. This action may be a totally distinct action from the
former case.
Rules on Redemption
(1) Real property sold, or any part thereof sold separately, may be
redeemed by the following persons:
(a) Judgment obligor, or his successor in interest in the whole or any part
of the property;
(b) Redemptioner a creditor having a lien by virtue of an attachment,
judgment or mortgage on the property sold, or on some part thereof,
subsequent to the lien under which the property was sold.
A mortgagee can be a redemptioner even if his mortgage has not yet
matured, but his mortgage contract must have been executed after the
entry of judgment. Generally in judicial foreclosure sale, there is no right of
redemption, but only equity of redemption. In sale of estate property to pay

off debts of the estate, there is no redemption at all. Only in extrajudicial
foreclosure sale and sale on execution is there the right of redemption.
(2) The judgment obligor, or redemptioner, may redeem the property from
the purchaser at any time within 1 year from the date of the registration of
the certificate of sale by paying the purchaser (a) the amount of his
purchase; (b) amount of any assessments or taxes which the purchaser
may have paid after purchase; (c) if the purchaser be also a creditor having
a prior lien to that of the redemptioner, other than the judgment under which
such purchase was made, the amount of such other lien; and (d) with 1
percent per month interest up to the time of redemption.
(3) Property redeemed may again be redeemed within 60 days after the last
redemption by a redemptioner, upon payment of: (a) the sum paid on the
last redemption, with additional 2 percent; (b) the amount of any
assessments or taxes which the last redemptioner may have paid thereon
after redemption by him, with interest; (c) the amount of any liens held by
said last redemptioner prior to his own, with interest.
(4) Effect of Redemption. If the judgment obligor redeems, he must make
the same payments as are required to effect a redemption by a
redemptioner, whereupon, no further redemption shall be allowed and he is
restored to his estate. The person to whom the redemption payment is
made must execute and deliver to him a certificate of redemption
acknowledged before a notary public or other officer authorized to take
acknowledgments of conveyances of real property. Such certificate must be
filed and recorded in the registry of deeds of the place in which the property
is situated, and the registrar of deeds must note the record thereof on the
margin of the record of the certificate of sale. The payments mentioned in
this and the last preceding sections may be made to the purchaser or
redemptioner, or for him to the officer who made the sale (Sec. 29).
(5) Proof required of redemptioner. A redemptioner must produce to the
officer, or person from whom he seeks to redeem, and serve with his notice
to the officer a copy of the judgment or final order under which he claims
the right to redeem, certified by the clerk of the court wherein the judgment
or final order is entered; or, if he redeems upon a mortgage or other lien, a
memorandum of the record thereof, certified by the registrar of deeds; or an
original or certified copy of any assignment necessary to establish his
claim; and an affidavit executed by him or his agent, showing the amount
then actually due on the lien (Sec. 30).
(6) Manner of using premises pending redemption. Until the expiration of
the time allowed for redemption, the court may, as in other proper cases,
restrain the commission of waste on the property by injunction, on the
application of the purchaser or the judgment obligee, with or without notice;
but it is not waste for a person in possession of the property at the time of
the sale, or entitled to possession afterwards, during the period allowed for
redemption, to continue to use it in the same manner in which it was
6
previously used; or to use it in the ordinary course of husbandry; or to make
the necessary repairs to buildings thereon while he occupies the property
(Sec. 31).
(7) Rents, earnings and income of property pending redemption. The
purchaser or a redemptioner shall not be entitled to receive the rents,
earnings and income of the property sold on execution, or the value of the
use and occupation thereof when such property is in the possession of a
tenant. All rents, earnings and income derived from the property pending
redemption shall belong to the judgment obligor until the expiration of his
period of redemption (Sec. 32).
(8) Deed and possession to be given at expiration of redemption period; by
whom executed or given. If no redemption be made within one (1) year from
the date of the registration of the certificate of sale, the purchaser is entitled
to a conveyance and possession of the property; or, if so redeemed
whenever sixty (60) days have elapsed and no other redemption has been
made, and notice thereof given, and the time for redemption has expired,
the last redemptioner is entitled to the conveyance and possession; but in
all cases the judgment obligor shall have the entire period of one (1) year
from the date of the registration of the sale to redeem the property. The
deed shall be executed by the officer making the sale or by his successor in
office, and in the latter case shall have the same validity as though the
officer making the sale had continued in office and executed it.
Upon the expiration of the right of redemption, the purchaser or
redemptioner shall be substituted to and acquire all the rights, title, interest
and claim of the judgment obligor to the property as of the time of the levy.
The possession of the property shall be given to the purchaser or last
redemptioner by the same officer unless a third party is actually holding the
property adversely to the judgment obligor (Sec. 33).
Examination of judgments obligor when judgment is unsatisfied
(Sec. 36)
(1) When the return of a writ of execution issued against property of a
judgment obligor, or any one of several obligors in the same judgment,
shows that the judgment remains unsatisfied, in whole or in part, the
judgment obligee, at any time after such return is made, shall be entitled to
an order from the court which rendered the said judgment, requiring such
judgment obligor to appear and be examined concerning his property and
income before such court or before a commissioner appointed by it, at a
specified time and place; and proceedings may thereupon be had for the
application of the property and income of the judgment obligor towards the
satisfaction of the judgment. But no judgment obligor shall be so required to
appear before a court or commissioner outside the province or city in which
such obligor resides or is found.

(2) 2002 Bar: The plaintiff, a Manila resident, sued the defendant, a resident
of Malolos, Bulacan, in the RTC-Manila for a sum of money. When the
sheriff tried to serve the summons with a copy of the complaint on the
defendant at his Bulacan residence, the sheriff was told that the defendant
had gone to Manila for business and would not be back until the evening of
that day. So, the sheriff served the summons, together with a copy of the
complaint, on the defendants 18-year old daughter, who was a college
student. For the defendants failure to answer the complaint within the
reglementary period, the trial court, on motion of the plaintiff, declared the
defendant in default. A month later, the trial court rendered judgment
holding the defendant liable for the entire amount prayer for in the
complaint.
After the judgment had become final, a writ of execution was issued by the
court. As the writ was returned unsatisfied, the plaintiff filed a motion for an
order requiring the defendant to appear before it and to be examined
regarding his property and income. How should the court resolve the
motion? (2%)
Answer: The RTC-Manila should deny the motion because it is in violation
of the rule that no judgment obligor shall be required to appear before a
court, for the purpose of examination concerning his property and income,
outside the province or city in which such obligor resides. In this case, the
judgment obligor resides in Bulacan (Rule 39, Section 36).
Examination of obligor of judgment obligor (Sec. 37)
(1) When the return of a writ of execution against the property of a judgment
obligor shows that the judgment remains unsatisfied, in whole or in part,
and upon proof to the satisfaction of the court which issued the writ, that
person, corporation, or other juridical entity has property of such judgment
obligor or is indebted to him, the court may, by an order, require such
person, corporation, or other juridical entity, or any officer or member
thereof, to appear before the court or a commissioner appointed by it, at a
time and place within the province or city where such debtor resides or is
found, and be examined concerning the same. The service of the order
shall bind all credits due the judgment obligor and all money and property of
the judgment obligor in the possession or in control of such person,
corporation, or juridical entity from the time of service; and the court may
also require notice of such proceedings to be given to any party to the
action in such manner as it may deem proper.
(2) 2008 Bar: The writ of execution was returned unsatisfied. The judgment
obligee subsequently received information that a bank holds a substantial
deposit belonging to the judgment obligor. If you are the counsel of the
judgment obligee, what steps would you take to reach the deposit to satisfy
the judgment? (3%)
Answer: I would ask for a writ of garnishment against the deposit in the
bank (Rule 57, Section 9[c])
7
b. If the bank denies holding the deposit in the name of the judgment
obligor but your clients informant is certain that the deposit belongs to the
judgment obligor under an assumed name, what is your remedy to reach
the deposit? (3%)
Answer: I will move for the examination under oath of the bak as a debtor of
the judgment debtor (Rule 39, Section 37). I will ask the court to issue an
order requiring the judgment obligor, or the person who has the property of
such judgment obligor, to appear before the court and be examined in
accordance with Sections 36 and 37 of Rule 39, for the complete
satisfaction of the judgment award (Co v. Salvador, AM No. P-07-2342,
08312007).
Effect of judgment or final orders: Res Judicata (Sec. 47)
(1) In case of a judgment or final order against a specific thing, or in respect
to the probate of a will, or the administration of the estate of a deceased
person, or in respect to the personal, political, or legal condition or status of
a particular person or his relationship to another, the judgment or final order
is conclusive upon the title to the thing, the will or administration, or the
condition, status or relationship of the person; however, the probate of a will
or granting of letters of administration shall only be prima facie evidence of
the truth of the testator or intestate;
(2) In other cases, the judgment or final order is, with respect to the matter
directly adjudged or as to any other matter that could have been raised in
relation thereto, conclusive between the parties and their successors in
interest by title subsequent to the commencement of the action or special
proceeding, litigating for the same thing and under the same title and in the
same capacity; and
(3) In any other litigation between the same parties or their successors in
interest, that only is deemed to have been adjudged in a former judgment or
final order which appears upon its face to have been so adjudged, or which
was actually and necessarily included therein or necessary thereto.
Enforcement and effect of foreign judgments or final orders (Sec. 48)
(1) In case of a judgment or final order upon a specific thing, the judgment
or final order is conclusive upon the title to the thing; and
(2) In case of a judgment or final order against a person, the judgment or
final order is presumptive evidence of a right as between the parties and
their successors in interest by a subsequent title. In either case, the
judgment or final order may be repelled by evidence of a want of
jurisdiction, want of notice to the party, collusion, fraud, or clear mistake of
law or fact.
(3) A foreign judgment on the mere strength of its promulgation is not yet
conclusive, as it can be annulled on the grounds of want of jurisdiction,
want of notice to the party, collusion, fraud, or clear mistake of law or fact. It
 8

is likewise recognized in Philippine jurisprudence and international law that be accompanied with an application for preliminary injunction (Asiavest
a foreign judgment may be barred from recognition if it runs counter to Merchant Bankers v. Ca, GR No. 110263, 07/20/2001).
public policy (Republic vs. Gingoyon, GR 166429, June 27, 2006).
(4) Arbitral award from a foreign jurisdiction is not enforceable and covered
by Rule 39, Sec. 48. It can only be recognized prior to its enforcement,
unless contrary to public policy (Mijares vs. Raada).
(5) In an action for enforcement of foreign judgment, the Court has limited
review over the decision rendered by the foreign tribunal. The Philippine
courts cannot pass upon the merits of the case pursuant to the
incorporation clause of the Constitution, unless there is proof of want of
jurisdiction, want of notice to the party, collusion, fraud, or clear mistake of
law or fact. (Bank of Philippine Islands v. Guevara, GR No. 167052,
03/11/2015).
(6) 2007 Bar: What are the rules on the recognition and enforcement of
foreign judgments in our courts? (6%)
Answer: The rules on the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments
in our courts are as follows:
(a) In case of a judgment or final order upon a specific thing, the judgment
or final order is conclusive upon the title to the thing (Sect 48[a]);
(b) In case of a judgment or final order against a person, the judgment or
final order is presumptive evidence of a right as between the parties and
their successors in interest by a subsequent title (Section 48[b]).
In either case, the judgment or final order may be repelled by evidence of a
want of jurisdiction, want of notice to the party, collusion, or fraud, or clear
mistake of law or fact.
b. Can a foreign arbitral award be enforced in the Philippines under those
rules? Explain briefly. (2%)
Answer: No. Foreign arbitral awards are not enforced like foreign court
judgments under Rule 39 of the Rules of Court, but they can be enforced
under Section 44. A foreign arbitral award, when confirmed by the RTC,
shall be enforced in the same manner as final and executory decisions of
courts of the Philippines. Said law provides that the case shall be filed with
the RTC as a special proceeding, and if the 1958 New York Convention on
the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Judgments is not applicable,
the court may, on grounds of comity and reciprocity, recognizes a non-
convention award as a convention award.
c. How about a global injunction issued by a foreign court to prevent
dissipation of funds against a defendant therein who has assets in the
Philippines? Explain briefly. (2%)
Answer: Yes, a global injunction, also known as the Mareva Injunction,
should be considered as an order of foreign court. Therefore, the rules on
recognition and enforcement of foreign judgments under Rule 39 must
apply. However, to prevent dissipation of funds, the action to enforce must