It
is basic in remedial law that a defendant in a civil case must apprise the
trial court and the adverse party of the facts alleged by the complaint that he
admits and of the facts alleged by the complaint that he wishes to place into
contention. The defendant does the former either by stating in his answer that
they are true or by failing to properly deny them. There are two ways of
denying alleged facts: one is by general denial, and the other, by specific
denial (Friedenthal, et al., Civil Procedure, 2nd Edition, §§5.18 and 5.19). In this
jurisdiction, only a specific denial
shall be sufficient to place into contention an alleged fact. Section 11, Rule 8, Rules of Court, provides:
Section 11. Allegations not specifically denied deemed admitted. ̶ Material averment in
the complaint, other than those as to the amount of unliquidated damages, shall
be deemed admitted when not specifically denied. Allegations of usury in a
complaint to recover usurious interest are deemed admitted if not denied under
oath. (1a,R9).
Under
Section 10, Rule 8 of the Rules of Court, a specific denial of an
allegation of the complaint may be made in any of three ways, namely: (a) a defendant specifies each
material allegation of fact the truth of which he does not admit and, whenever
practicable, sets forth the substance of the matters upon which he relies to
support his denial; (b) a defendant who desires to deny only a part of
an averment specifies so much of it as is true and material and denies only the
remainder; and (c) a defendant who is without knowledge or information
sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of a material averment made in the
complaint states so, which has the effect of a denial. x x x x x x In other words, while the admission is admissible in evidence,
its probative value is to be determined from the whole statement and others
intimately related or connected therewith as an integrated unit. Although acts or facts admitted
do not require proof and cannot be contradicted, however, evidence aliunde can
be presented to show that the admission was made through palpable
mistake. The rule is always
in favor of liberality in construction of pleadings so that the real matter in
dispute may be submitted to the judgment of the court (REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. SANDIGANBAYAN, G.R. No. 166859, April 12, 2011, BERSAMIN, J.).
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.