1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 12

2001 Edition < DRAFT COPY; Please check for errors > Bill of Particulars

Rule 12
BILL OF PARTICULARS

Section 1. When applied for; purpose. Before responding to a pleading, a

party may move for a definite statement or for a bill of particulars of any
matter which is not averred with sufficient definiteness or particularity to
enable him properly to prepare his responsive pleading. If the pleading is a
reply, the motion must be filed within ten (10) days from service thereof. Such
motion shall point out the defects complained of, the paragraphs wherein they
are contained, and the details desired. (1a)

Q: Define Bill of Particulars.

A: A bill of particulars is a more definite statement of any matter which is not averred with
sufficient definiteness or particularity in a pleading so as to enable the opposing party to prepare his
responsive pleading. (Section 1)

Alright. So, let’s go to the application of this remedy.

EXAMPLE: The plaintiff filed a complaint against you and you are now furnished with a copy by
the lawyer of the plaintiff. So, you have to file your answer. You have to understand what the cause of
action is all about. So you read the complaint – you notice that the allegations are vague, ambiguous,
and uncertain. So, you cannot understand the allegations. So, you have a hard time preparing your
answer. Now, you do not want to answer something that you cannot understand.
Q: So what is your remedy?
A: The remedy is, instead of answering, you file a motion for a bill of particulars and according to
Section 1, your motion will point out the defects complained of, the paragraphs where they are
contained and the details desired. Because according to you, the allegations are not averred with
sufficient definiteness or particularity to enable you properly to prepare your responsive pleading that
is what it is all about.

So the defendant resorts to the Bill of Particulars if the allegations of ultimate facts in the complaint
are vague and ambiguous that the defendant will have difficulty in preparing his answer. So, he can
not understand and will ask for more details to clear the ambiguities. He will file a motion for Bill of
Particulars, citing the detects and ask for the details, because how can he prepare an answer if he does
not understand the complaint? Aber?

BAR QUESTION: Suppose a complaint is ambiguous, uncertain, indefinite or vague, can the
defendant file a motion to dismiss?
A: NO! A complaint cannot be dismissed simply because it is vague, ambiguous. (Pañgan vs.
Evening News, L-13308, Oct. 29, 1960) The correct remedy is for the defendant to file a motion for bill
of particulars, which will ask for more details on these vague portions of the complaint. (Amoro vs.
Sumaguit, L-14986, July 31, 1962)

According to the SC in the case of

TAN vs. SANDIGANBAYAN

180 SCRA 34 [1989]

HELD: “The proper office of a bill of particulars is to inform the opposite party and the
court of the precise nature and character of the cause of action the pleader has attempted to
set forth, and thereby to guide his adversary in his preparations for trial and reasonably
protect him against surprise at the trial. It complements the rule on pleadings in general,
that is, that the complaint should consist of a concise statement of the ultimate facts.”
“Its primary objective is to apprise the adverse party of what the plaintiff wants — to
preclude the latter from springing a surprise attack later.”

Property of LAKAS ATENISTA 179

1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 12
2001 Edition < DRAFT COPY; Please check for errors > Bill of Particulars

According to the SC, the primary purpose of the bill of particulars is to apprise the adverse party of
what a plaintiff wants. To preclude the latter from springing a surprise attack later. Why? Because the
plaintiff may deliberately make his allegations vague. Sinadya ba niya? To confuse you – to mislead
you – because you might adopt a different interpretation. If the interpretation turns out to be different,
your defenses might be wrong. So, he deliberately make his complaint ambiguous. Now, the other
party should thwart that by asking for a bill of particulars to compel the plaintiff to make the
allegations of his cause of action clearer. So, that is what the bill of particulars is all about.

Now, we will do to a specific situation and let’s find out whether the defendant could file for a bill
of particulars.

PROBLEM: Now, suppose the pleader says in his complaint that he has been in the possession of
the litigated property continuously for forty (40) years. The defendant flied a motion for a bill of
particulars, “The allegations is very broad, very general, very vague. Please tell by way of particulars
what are the improvements you introduced for the past 40 years. I would like to ask for these details to
clarify your allegations that you have been in continuous possession of the land for 40 years.”
Q: Is that a proper motion for a Bill of Particulars?
A: NO, because it is asking for evidentiary matters. In the first place, the plaintiff has no obligation
to state the evidentiary matters in his complaint. It should only state ultimate facts. So, it is not allowed
in the pleading. You cannot ask for that by way of particulars.

So, what is sought to be remedied are vague and ambiguous statements of ultimate facts. But you
cannot used it to fish for evidentiary matters. Evidentiary facts cannot be the subject of a motion for a
bill of particulars.

Q: But is it not fair that before trial I should know your evidentiary matters?
A: I believe it is fair for the defendant to compel the plaintiff to reveal the details of his ultimate
facts but not under Rule 12. You better avail of the modes of discovery under Rule 23, depositions,
request for admission, etc. But you cannot convert Rule 12 into a modes of discovery. Each rule has its
own functions.

So, let’s give a good example of an instance, where the defendant can rightfully ask for more
specifics or particulars.

EXAMPLE: The plaintiff will sue the defendant for annulment of contract on the ground that the
defendant employed FRAUD in getting the consent of the plaintiff. The plaintiff said, “He got my
consent to the contract by fraud.” The defendant filed a motion for a bill of particulars: “That the
defendant employed fraud in getting plaintiff’s consent is vague, So, I’m asking the plaintiff should
give more specifics. How did I fool you? In what way did I employ fraud? In what way was the fraud
exercised?”
Q: Now, is the motion for a bill of particulars meritorious?
A: YES, because allegations of fraud must be stated with particularity. So, you go back in Rule 8,
Section 5:

Rule 8, Sec. 5 Fraud, mistake, condition of the mind.—In all averments of fraud
or mistake, the circumstances constituting fraud or mistake must be state with
particularity. x x x

We already studied that provision. Therefore, if the allegation of the plaintiff is simply that the
defendant employed fraud, that allegation is not sufficient because under Rule 8, it must be stated with
particularity. Therefore, if it is not stated with particularity, the remedy of the defendant is to file a
motion for a bill of particulars under Rule 12.

Q: Suppose, it is the answer which is vague. Suppose ang answer malabo. It is the other way
around. It is the defendant’s answer which is vague or uncertain. Can the plaintiff file a motion for bill
of particulars to compel he defendant to clarify or to particularize his vague answer?
A: YES, because the plaintiff can say, “I cannot file my reply. I mean, I want to file a reply but I can’t
file a reply unless I understand what is your defense.” So it works both ways.

Property of LAKAS ATENISTA 180

1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 12
2001 Edition < DRAFT COPY; Please check for errors > Bill of Particulars

Q: Suppose, it is the reply of the plaintiff to the answer which is vague or ambiguous. Can the
defendant file a motion for bill of particulars to clarify the vague reply?
A: YES. According to Section 1, the motion is to be filed within 10 days. So even if the reply is
vague, it can still be the subject of the bill of particulars within 10 days because there is no more
responsive pleadings there.

So, every pleading which is vague the other party can always compel you to make it clearer.

Q: Is this remedy available in criminal cases?

A: YES. If it is the information which is vague, you cannot understand the allegations in the
information, you cannot plead, “Paano, I cannot enter a plea of guilty or not guilty kasi hindi ko
maintindihan eh” the accused can file a motion for bill of particulars to require the prosecution to
clarify vague portions of a complaint or information.

There is an identical provision in Rule 116, Section 9 of the Rules on Criminal Procedure.

RULE 116, SEC. 9. Bill of particulars. – The accused may, before arraignment,
move for a bill of particulars to enable him properly to plead and prepare for
trial. The motion shall specify the alleged defects of the complaint or information
and the details desired. (10a)

The concept is the same. If the allegations in the information are also vague and ambiguous, “I
cannot understand it, so I cannot intelligently enter my plea.” The accused, before arraignment, can
move for a bill of particulars to enable him to prepare properly for the trial. Then he must specify the
defects.
CINCO vs. SANDIGANBAYAN (criminal case)
202 SCRA 726 [1991]

FACTS: A motion for bill of particulars was filed by the lawyer of the respondent in the
fiscal’s office when the case was under preliminary investigation. (In preliminary
investigation, you are given the affidavit of the complainant and his witnesses. And then
you are given 10 days to submit your counter-affidavits.) Here, the affidavit is vague
according to the accused, so he is filing a bill of particulars. He wanted to compel the
complainant to make his affidavit clearer.

ISSUE: Is Section 9 applicable when the case is still in the fiscal’s office for preliminary
investigation?

HELD: NO. It is only applicable when the case is already in court for trial or
arraignment.
But suppose during the preliminary investigation, “I cannot understand what the
complainant is saying in his affidavit?” The SC said, that is simple! If you cannot
understand what the complainant is saying in his affidavit, chances are, the fiscal also will
not understand it. And consequently, he will dismiss the case. Eh di mas maganda! Wag ka
na lang mag-reklamo! [tanga!]

Sec. 2. Action by the court. Upon the filing of the motion, the clerk of
court must immediately bring it to the attention of the court which may either
deny or grant it outright, or allow the parties the opportunity to be heard. (n)

So pag-file mo ng motion for bill of particulars, the clerk has the obligation to bring it immediately
to the attention of the court and the court can deny or grant the motion immediately. But of course, it is
up to the court to call for a hearing or not.

Q: Now, what do you think is the reason behind that? Why do you think is this provision here,
which is not found in the old rules?
A: Many lawyers have abused Rule 12. In what way? A complaint is filed. The allegations are clear.
Pero sadyain niya – he will file a motion for bill of particulars that he cannot understand. Then, pag file
niya ng motion, he will set the motion for hearing 2 weeks from now. Then the motion is denied
because it has no merit, then, file ka ng answer. In other words, the period to file for an answer has
Property of LAKAS ATENISTA 181
1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 12
2001 Edition < DRAFT COPY; Please check for errors > Bill of Particulars

been denied because it has no merit. Then, file ka ng answer. The period to file for an answer has been
delayed. The defendant has succeeded in delaying the period for filing an answer by pretending that he
cannot understand pero actually klaro man ba.

So in order to prevent that kind of dilatory tactic, when the motion is filed, the court is now
authorized to immediately act on the motion without delaying the filing of the answer. That is the
reason why this provision was inserted because the filing of the motion for bill of particulars can cause
delay.

Sec. 3. Compliance with order. If the motion is granted, either in whole or

in part, the compliance therewith must be effected within ten (l0) days from
notice of the order, unless a different period is fixed by the court. The bill
of particulars or a more definite statement ordered by the court may be filed
either in a separate or in an amended pleading, serving a copy thereof on the
adverse party. (n)

Q: Suppose the court grants the motion and the defendant or the plaintiff will be required to submit
the bill of particulars. How will you comply with the order to file a bill of particulars?
A: There are two (2) ways:
1.) Just submit the details of the vague paragraphs; or
2.) Amend the whole complaint and clarify the vague paragraphs

Sec. 4. Effect of non-compliance. If the order is not obeyed, or in case of

insufficient compliance therewith, the court may order the striking out of the
pleading or the portions thereof to which the order was directed or make such
other order as it deems just. (1[c]a)

Q: Alright, suppose the motion is granted, the court ordered the plaintiff to submit a bill of
particulars. The plaintiff refused to comply with the order. What is now the remedy?
A: The court may order the striking out of the pleading or portions thereof which is the object of the
bill of particulars. Like for example: Ayaw mong i-clarify ang complaint mo, ayaw mo. Alright, I will
now issue an order to strike out the entire complaint. It is as if the complaint was never filed.
Practically, your complaint was dismissed. In effect your complaint was dismissed because if the
complaint was ordered stricken out, then it is equivalent to dismissal of the case itself.

Sec. 5. Stay of period to file responsive pleading. After service of the

bill of particulars or of a more definite pleading, or after notice of denial of
his motion, the moving party may file his responsive pleading within the period
to which he was entitled at the time of filing his motion, which shall not be
less than five (5) days in any event. (1[b]a)

Q: What is the effect for a motion for a bill of particulars when you file a motion? What is the effect
on that on the 15-day period to file the answer?

A. The 15-day period to answer is stopped or interrupted upon the filing of the motion for bill of
particulars. The period continues to run from the date that you received the bill of particulars, if your
motion is granted, or from the receipt of the order denying your motion if it was denied. From there,
the period to answer will run again so you have to file your answer within the balance of the remaining
period.

ILLUSTRATION: I have 15 days to file an answer. On the 8th day, I filed a motion for a bill of
particulars. Pag-file mo on the 8th day , the running of the period automatically stops and then after
several days, you receive the order. For example, denying your motion, you still have 7 days to go
because the period during which your motion was pending will not be counted. Na- interrupt ang
takbo ng 15 days.

Q: Suppose, you file your motion for a bill of particulars on the 14th day and your motion is denied.
You received the order today. How many days more to file an answer?
A: Five (5) days. You are guaranteed a minimum of 5 days. Kahit one day to go na lang, balik ka
naman sa 5. At least minimum. So, it is 5 days or more but never be less than 5 days.

Property of LAKAS ATENISTA 182

1997 Rules on Civil Procedure Rule 12
2001 Edition < DRAFT COPY; Please check for errors > Bill of Particulars

Therefore, if a defendant filed the motion for bill of particulars within 15 days, he cannot be
declared in default. The plaintiff cannot declare the defendant in default for failure to file an answer
because 15 days had already lapse. Pag file ng motion, itigil mo muna ang takbo ng araw. It will be
interrupted by the filing of the motion and the period commences to run again from the time he
received the bill of particulars or the order denying his motion but not less than 5 days in any event.

Sec. 6. Bill a part of pleading. A bill of particulars becomes part of the

pleading for which it is intended. (1[a]a)

Ah, yes. It is very clear ‘no? When you file a bill of particulars clarifying the paragraphs in the
complaint which are vague, the bill of particulars becomes part of the complaint with its supplements.


published by

LAKAS ATENISTA 1997 – 1998: FOURTH YEAR: Anna Vanessa Angeles • Glenda Buhion • Joseph
Martin Castillo • Aaron Philip Cruz • Pearly Joan Jayagan • Anderson Lo •
Yogie Martirizar • Frecelyn Mejia • Dorothy Montejo • Rowena Panales • Regina Sison •
Ruby Teleron • Marilou Timbol • Maceste Uy • Perla Vicencio • Liberty Wong • Jude Zamora •
Special Thanks to: Marissa Corrales and July Romena

SECOND YEAR: Jonalyn Adiong • Emily Aliño • Karen Allones • Joseph Apao •
Melody Penelope Batu • Gemma Betonio • Rocky Cabarroguis • Charina Cabrera •
Marlon Cascuejo • Mike Castaños • Karen de Leon • Cherry Frondozo • Jude Fuentes • Maila Ilao
• Ilai Llena • Rocky Malaki • Jenny Namoc • Ines Papaya • Jennifer Ramos • Paisal Tanjili

LAKAS ATENISTA 2001–2002: REVISION COMMITTEE: Melissa Suarez • Jessamyn Agustin •

Judee Uy • Janice Joanne Torres • Genie Salvania • Pches Fernandez • Riezl Locsin •
Kenneth Lim • Charles Concon • Roy Acelar • Francis Ampig • Karen Cacabelos •
Maying Dadula • Hannah Examen • Thea Guadalope • Myra Montecalvo • Paul Ongkingco •
Michael Pito • Rod Quiachon • Maya Quitain • Rina Sacdalan • Lyle Santos • Joshua Tan •
Thaddeus Tuburan • John Vera Cruz • Mortmort

Property of LAKAS ATENISTA 183