Dear PAO,

I just want to inquire on behalf of my friend’s father. He is a defendant in a civil case, but his lawyer is currently in the hospital. He was informed of the date of the pre-trial hearing, and he plans to attend, but he is unsure if his lawyer will be able to join because of his medical condition. Someone from the plaintiff’s side seems to have insinuated, through a cryptic social media post, that my friend’s father will lose the opportunity to present evidence if his lawyer is absent. This has made them anxious, as they have sufficient proof to support their case. Is pre-trial really that important? Does a defendant really lose the opportunity to present evidence if they attend the pre-trial hearing, albeit the absence of his or her lawyer?

Jean

Dear Jean,

Pre-trial is an important part of the legal procedure. It is mandatory, and in civil cases, it serves the following purposes:

“x x x (a) The possibility of an amicable settlement or of a submission to alternative modes of dispute resolution;

“(b) The simplification of the issues;

“(c) The possibility of obtaining stipulations or admissions of facts arid of documents to avoid unnecessary proof;

“(d) The limitation of the number and identification of witnesses and the setting of trial dates;

“(e) The advisability of a preliminary reference of issues to a commissioner;

“(f) The propriety of rendering judgment on the pleadings, or summary judgment, or of dismissing the action should a valid ground therefor be found to exist;

“(g) The requirement for the parties to:

“1) Mark their respective evidence if not yet marked in the judicial affidavits of their witnesses;

“2) Examine and make comparisons of the adverse parties’ evidence vis-a-vis the copies to be marked;

“3) Manifest for the record stipulations regarding the faithfulness of the reproductions and the genuineness and due execution of the adverse parties’ evidence;

“4) Reserve evidence not available at the pre-trial, but only in the following manner:

“1) For testimonial evidence, by giving the name or position and the nature of the testimony of the proposed witness;

“2) For documentary evidence and other object evidence, by giving a particular description of the evidence. x x x

“(h) Such other matters as may aid in the prompt disposition of the action.” [Section 2, Rule 18, 2019 Amendments to the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure (AM 19-10-20-SC)]

Straightforwardly expressed by the Supreme Court, through Associate Justice Ramon Paul Hernando, in the case of Patricio G. Gemina v. Heirs of Gerardo V. Espejo, Jr. (GR 232682, Sept. 13, 2021), “Pre-trial serves a significant purpose in court proceedings. It simplifies, abbreviates and expedites the trial, if not the entire process of administering and dispensing justice. For this reason, the parties and their counsels cannot take this stage for granted as it is more than just a part of procedural law or its technicality. x x x”

It bears stressing that both parties and their respective counsels should appear at the pre-trial under. Their absence, after they have been duly notified, can have an adverse effect to their legal cause. To be certain, Sections 4 and 5, Rule 18 of AM 19-10-20-SC states:

“Section 4. Appearance of Parties. – It shall be the duty of the parties and their counsel to appear at the pre-trial, court-annexed mediation, and judicial dispute resolution, if necessary. The non-appearance of a party and counsel may be excused only for acts of God, force majeure, or duly substantiated physical inability.

“A representative may appear on behalf of a party, but shall be fully authorized in writing to enter into an amicable settlement to submit to alternative modes of dispute resolution, and to enter into stipulations or admissions of facts and documents.

“Section 5. Effect of failure to appear. – When duly notified, the failure of the plaintiff and counsel to appear without valid cause when so required, pursuant to the next preceding Section, shall cause the dismissal of the action. The dismissal shall be with prejudice, unless otherwise ordered by the court. A similar failure on the part of the defendant and counsel shall be cause to allow the plaintiff to present his or her evidence ex-parte within ten (10) calendar days from termination of pre-trial, and the court to render judgment on the basis of the evidence offered.”

Taking the foregoing into consideration, we submit that your friend’s father may lose the opportunity to present evidence only if both he and his counsel will not be present during the pre-trial hearing, given that Section 5, Rule 18 of AM 19-10-20-SC made use of the conjunction “and”. However, if your friend’s father attends the pre-trial and his counsel is unable to attend due to a duly substantiated physical inability, it will not result to him losing the opportunity to present evidence. As further explained by the Supreme Court in the case of Gemina v. Heirs of Espejo, Jr. (id):

“With the advent of AM 19-10-20-SC, said Section 5 has been clarified by already including the word counsel and putting the conjunctive word and, to the effect that it is only when both the party-litigant (plaintiff or defendant) and his counsel fail to appear in pre-trial that there be the concomitant consequence of either a dismissal (plaintiff and counsel were absent), or presentation of evidence ex parte (defendant and counsel were absent). x x x”

We hope that we were able to answer your queries. Please be reminded that this advice is based solely on the facts you have narrated and our appreciation of the same. Our opinion may vary when other facts are changed or elaborated.

Editor’s note: Dear PAO is a daily column of the Public Attorney’s Office. Questions for Chief Acosta may be sent to [email protected]