Definition

Section 2, Rule 13 of the Rules of Court defines and distinguishes Filing from Service. Filing is
the act of presenting the pleading or other paper to the clerk of court.
While, Service, is the act of providing a party with a copy of the pleading or paper concerned. If
any party has appeared by counsel, service upon him shall be made upon his counsel or one of
them, unless service upon the party himself is ordered by the court. Where one counsel appears
for several parties, he shall only be entitled to one copy of any paper served upon him by the
opposite side.
Purpose
The purpose of the Rule is mainly to appraise such party of the pendency of an action before
the courts. Therefore, if such party was already notified of such action and had even
participated in the proceedings the purpose of this Rule is deemed fulfilled.
Who may file and When to file
Filed by the party which is submitting the Pleadings, Judgments and Other Papers, their
representatives, any peace officer, or public officer charged with the submission of the said
papers.
Manner of Filing
Under Section 3 of Rule 13 lays down the following; Manner of filing. — The filing of pleadings,
appearances, motions, notices, orders, judgments and all other papers shall be made by
presenting the original copies thereof, plainly indicated as such, personally to the clerk of court
or by sending them by registered mail. In the first case, the clerk of court shall endorse on the
pleading the date and hour of filing. In the second case, the date of the mailing of motions,
pleadings, or any other papers or payments or deposits, as shown by the post office stamp on
the envelope or the registry receipt, shall be considered as the date of their filing, payment, or
deposit in court. The envelope shall be attached to the record of the case.
Modes of Service
1.) Personal service is done by:
◦ Delivering personally a copy to the party or his counsel;
◦ Leaving a copy in counsel’s office with his clerk or with a person having charge
thereof; or
◦ Leaving the copy between 8 a.m. and 6 p.m. at the party’s or counsel’s
residence, if known, with a person of sufficient age and discretion residing therein
if no person found in his office, or if his office is unknown, or if he has no office
(Sec. 6, Rule 13)
2.) Service by mail is done by:
◦ By depositing the copy in the post office in a sealed envelope, plainly addressed
to the party or his counsel at his office, if known, otherwise at his residence, if
 known, with postage fully prepaid, and with instructions to the postmaster to
return the mail to the sender after 10 days if undelivered; or
◦ Ordinary mail, if no registry service is available in the locality of either the sender
or the addressee (Sec. 7, Rule 13)
3.) Substituted Service is done by:
◦ If service of pleadings, motions, notices, resolutions, orders and other papers
cannot be made through personal service or by mail, the office and place of
residence of the party or his counsel being unknown, service may be made by
delivering the copy to the clerk of court, with proof of failure of both personal
service and service by mail (Sec. 8, Rule 13)
When is Service deemed complete:
1.) Personal service – upon actual delivery;
2.) Service by ordinary mail – upon expiration of 10 days after mailing, unless the
court otherwise provides;
3.) Service by registered mail – upon actual receipt by the addressee, or 5 days from
the date he received the first notice of the postmaster, whichever date is earlier
4.) Substituted service – at the time of such delivery (Sec. 8, Rule 13).
The Rule on completeness of service by registered mail only provides for a disputable
presumption. The burden is on the petitioner to show that the postmaster’s notice never reached
him and that he did not acquire knowledge of the judgment. (Quelnan v. VHF Philippines)
Service of judgment on security guard of building where counsel’s office is located is valid and
binding. (Mendoza v. CA)
Service of notice of pre-trial on OSG is binding even if no notice was sent to the deputized
counsel. (Republic v. Viaje)
Service of resolution denying MR upon collaborating counsel already binds the client.
(Philippine Asset Growth v. Fastech PHL)

Proof of Filing
Generally, filing is proven by its existence in the record of the case. But if it is not in the records
and if it was filed personally it must be proved by the written or stamped acknowledgement of its
filing by the clerk of court on a copy of the same. Or if it was filed by registered mail proved by
the registry receipt and the affidavit of the person who did the mailing with the full statement of:
a. The date and place of depositing the mail in the post office in a sealed envelope
addressed to the court;
b. With postage fully paid; and
c. With instructions to the postmaster to return the mail to the sender after 10 days if
undelivered (Sec. 12, Rule 13)
Proof of Personal Service
  Written Admission of the party served;
 Official return of the server; or
 Affidavit of the party serving, containing the date, place and manner of service
(Sec. 13, Rule 13)
Proof of Service by Ordinary Mail

 Affidavit of mailer showing compliance of Sec. 7, Rule 13; and

 Registry receipt issued by the mailing officer (Sec. 13, Rule 13)
Proof of Service by Ordinary Mail

 Affidavit; and
 Registry receipt issued by the mailing office (Sec. 13, Rule 13)

Sample of Affidavit of Personal Service

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

NATIONAL CAPITAL JUDICIAL REGION
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
Makati City
Branch No. 148

AHA Fruits Company, Civil Case No. 923-M-90

Plaintiffs, Collection for Sum of Money
versus

General Food Products Distribution Co.,

Defendant,
x--------------------------------------------------x

ANSWER

DEFENDANT, through undersigned counsel, before this Honorable Court most respectfully
states that:

1. Defendant admits the averments in Paragraphs one (1) and two (2) of the Complaint;

2. Defendant specifically denies the allegation in Paragraph three (3) of the Complaint,
the truth, that the plaintiff never executed a contract on the amount of Seven Hundred
Fifty Thousand Sesos (PHP750,000.00) and that defendant’s signature was forged;

3. Defendant denies the averment in Paragraph four (4) of the Complaint as to the receipt
of the genuineness and due execution of the delivery receipt is concerned;
 4. Defendant has no knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the
averment in Paragraph five (5) of the Complaint;

5. Defendant specifically denies under oath the allegation in Paragraphs six (6) and seven
(7) of the Complaint, the truth being that the signature was forged and that they did not
in fact signed the said contract and there was no notice received by the defendant
thereof, as evidenced by the records of the defendant as Annex “A”;

6. Defendant has no knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the

averment in Paragraph eight (8) of the Complaint;

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

Having answered the Complaint, the Defendant, GENERAL FOOD PRODUCTS

DISTRIBUTION CO., asserts the following enumerated Affirmative Defenses:

1. Signature of the Defendant was forged and that they did not in fact signed the alleged
contract.

2. All statements and comments made by the Defendant about the Plaintiff were made by
the Defendant with good motive and fair intention;

3. Plaintiff has failed to set forth ultimate facts due to inconsistency of the statements as
to the alleged transactions executed between the parties;

4. No act or omission on the part of the Defendant either caused or contributed to

whatever injury, if any, to the Plaintiff may have sustained.

PRAYER/COUNTERCLAIM

Defendant, GENERAL FOOD PRODUCTS DISTRIBUTION CO. alleges:

That by virtue of this unwarranted and malicious act initiated by the Plaintiff, Defendant was
forced to engaged counsel in the sum of Two Hundred Thousand Pesos (P200,000.00).

WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that the complaint be dismissed and defendant be

answered the amount of Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (P500,000.00).

Other just and equitable reliefs are likewise prayed for.

Makati, June 28, 2019

Atty. ROMINA MONDRAGON

456 J.P Rizal Avenue, Makati City
IBP No. 98765, Makati 1-23456
Attorney’s Roll No. 123456
PTR No.453267; 06-28-19, City of Makati
MCLE Compliance No. 111222333, 03-03-93
MCLE No. VI-001268; June 28, 2019
[email protected]
0912 3456 789

Copy furnished through personal service:

Atty. Apolinario Mabini

Counsel for the plaintiff
124 Antonio Luna St.,
Brgy. Urdaneta, Makati City

Republic of the Philippines)

City of Makati )S.S.
x----------x

AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE

I, Sana Minatozaki, of legal age, single, and a resident of Makati, Philippines, after having been duly
sworn in accordance with law, hereby depose and say:

That I am a Secretary / Legal Aide of the law office of Atty. Romina Mondragom with office address at
456 J.P Rizal Avenue, Makati City, Philippines;

That in my aforementioned capacity, I had personally served a copy of the pleading in the case entitled
“AHA Fruits Company v. General Food Products distribution Co.” docketed as Civil Case No. 923-M-90
(by personal service) to the office of Jose Manuel Rizal's Counsel of Record, Atty. Apolinario Mabini,
with address at 124 Antonio Luna St., Brgy. Urdaneta, Makati City

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 5th of June, 2019 at Makati City, Philippines

(Sgd.) ROGELIO DELA CRUZ

AFFIANT
SUBSCRIBED and sworn to me before this 20th day of June 2019 in Makati City affiant after
exhibiting to me his Philippine passport, as competent evidence of his identity.

Atty. DELFIN DIMASALANG

123 Pio Del Pilar St., Brgy. San Isidro, Makati City
IBP No. 12345, Makati 1-98765
Attorney’s Roll No. 67890
PTR No.3456; 06-28-19, City of Makati
MCLE Compliance No. 999888777, 03-03-98
MCLE No. VI-001268; June 28, 2019
[email protected]
0912 3456 789

Doc No. 20
Page No. 5
Book No. 2
Series of 2019

VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION AGAINST FORUM SHOPPING

I, Rogelio Dela Cruz, Filipino, of legal age, married and residing at 456 Malugay St., Brgy. San
Isidro, Makati City is authorized by the Defendant corporation in filling the Answer, attached is
the board resolution as “ANNEX B”, after having been sworn in accordance with law, depose
and state that:

1. I am the Defendant in the above-entitled case and have caused the preparation of the
foregoing Answer;

2. I have read and understood the allegations therein and the same are true and correct of
my own personal knowledge and/or based on authentic records;

3. I attest to the authenticity of the annexes hereof;

4. I have not commenced any action or filed any claim involving the same issues in any
court, tribunal or quasi-judicial agency, and to the best of my knowledge, no such
other action or claim is pending therein;
 5. If there is such other pending action or claim, I will furnish this Honorable Court with
a complete statement of the present status thereof; and

6. If I should thereafter learn that the same or similar action or claim has been filed or is
pending, I shall report the fact within five (5) days therefrom to this Honorable Court
wherein my aforesaid complaint has been filed.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 18 th day of June 2019, Makati City,
Philippines.

ROGELIO DELA CRUZ

Affiant

SUBSCRIBED and sworn to me before this 20th day of June 2019 in Makati City affiant after
exhibiting to me his Philippine passport, as competent evidence of his identity.

Atty. DELFIN DIMASALANG

123 Pio Del Pilar St., Brgy. San Isidro, Makati City
IBP No. 12345, Makati 1-98765
Attorney’s Roll No. 67890
PTR No.3456; 06-28-19, City of Makati
MCLE Compliance No. 999888777, 03-03-98
MCLE No. VI-001268; June 28, 2019
[email protected]
0912 3456 789

Doc No. 20
Page No. 5
Book No. 2
Series of 2019

Sample of Affidavit of Service by Registered Mail

REPUBLIC OF THE PHILIPPINES

NATIONA CAPITAL JUDICIAL REGION
REGIONAL TRIAL COURT
Makati City
Branch No. 148

AHA Fruits Company, Civil Case No. 923-M-90

Plaintiffs, Collection for Sum of Money
versus

General Food Products Distribution Co.,

 Defendant,
x--------------------------------------------------x

ANSWER

DEFENDANT, through undersigned counsel, before this Honorable Court most respectfully
states that:

1. Defendant admits the averments in Paragraphs one (1) and two (2) of the Complaint;

2. Defendant specifically denies the allegation in Paragraph three (3) of the Complaint,
the truth, that the plaintiff never executed a contract on the amount of Seven Hundred
Fifty Thousand Sesos (PHP750,000.00) and that defendant’s signature was forged;

3. Defendant denies the averment in Paragraph four (4) of the Complaint as to the receipt
of the genuineness and due execution of the delivery receipt is concerned;

4. Defendant has no knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the

averment in Paragraph five (5) of the Complaint;

5. Defendant specifically denies under oath the allegation in Paragraphs six (6) and seven
(7) of the Complaint, the truth being that the signature was forged and that they did not
in fact signed the said contract and there was no notice received by the defendant
thereof, as evidenced by the records of the defendant as Annex “A”;

6. Defendant has no knowledge or information to form a belief as to the truth of the

averment in Paragraph eight (8) of the Complaint;

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES

Having answered the Complaint, the Defendant, GENERAL FOOD PRODUCTS

DISTRIBUTION CO., asserts the following enumerated Affirmative Defenses:

1. Signature of the Defendant was forged and that they did not in fact signed the alleged
contract.

2. All statements and comments made by the Defendant about the Plaintiff were made by
the Defendant with good motive and fair intention;

3. Plaintiff has failed to set forth ultimate facts due to inconsistency of the statements as
to the alleged transactions executed between the parties;

4. No act or omission on the part of the Defendant either caused or contributed to

whatever injury, if any, to the Plaintiff may have sustained.
 PRAYER/COUNTERCLAIM

Defendant, GENERAL FOOD PRODUCTS DISTRIBUTION CO. alleges:

That by virtue of this unwarranted and malicious act initiated by the Plaintiff, Defendant was
forced to engaged counsel in the sum of Two Hundred Thousand Pesos (P200,000.00).

WHEREFORE, it is respectfully prayed that the complaint be dismissed and defendant be

answered the amount of Five Hundred Thousand Pesos (P500,000.00).

Other just and equitable reliefs are likewise prayed for.

Makati, June 28, 2019

Atty. ROMINA MONDRAGON

456 J.P Rizal Avenue, Makati City
IBP No. 98765, Makati 1-23456
Attorney’s Roll No. 123456
PTR No.453267; 06-28-19, City of Makati
MCLE Compliance No. 111222333, 03-03-93
MCLE No. VI-001268; June 28, 2019
[email protected]
0912 3456 789

Copy furnished through registered mail:

Atty. Apolinario Mabini

Counsel for the plaintiff
124 Antonio Luna St.,
Brgy. Urdaneta, Makati City
Registry Receipt No. 123
Post Office
June 5, 2019

EXPLANATION

The foregoing pleading and its attachment were served on Atty. Apolinario Mabini by registered
mail instead of personal service as counsel for petitioner only has one messenger and personal service
would have resulted in the motion not being filed on time to the detriment of petitioner.

(Sgd.) ATTY. ROMINA MONDRAGON

Republic of the Philippines )

City of ) s.s.

AFFIDAVIT OF SERVICE BY MAIL

I, Sana Minatozaki, a messenger of Atty. Romina Mondragon, with office address at 456 J.P
Rizal Avenue, Makati City, after being duly sworn, deposes and states:

That on July 2, 2019, I served a copy of the following pleadings/papers by registered mail in
accordance with Section 10, Rule 13 of the Rules of Court:

Answer

in Civil Case No. 923-M-90 entitled “AHA Fruits Company v. General Food Products distribution Co.”
by depositing a copy in the post office in a sealed envelope, plainly addressed to Atty. Apolinario Mabini
at 124 Antonio Luna St., Brgy. Urdaneta, Makati City with postage fully paid, as evidenced by Registry
Receipt No. 123 attached and with instructions to the post master to return the main to sender after ten
(10) days if undelivered.

TO THE TRUTH OF THE FOREGOING, I have signed this Affidavit on the 5 th of June, 2019 in
the City of Makati, Philippines.

(Sgd.) ROGELIO DELA CRUZ

Affiant

SUBSCRIBED and sworn to me before this 20th day of June 2019 in Makati City affiant after
exhibiting to me his Philippine passport, as competent evidence of his identity.

Atty. DELFIN DIMASALANG

123 Pio Del Pilar St., Brgy. San Isidro, Makati City
IBP No. 12345, Makati 1-98765
Attorney’s Roll No. 67890
PTR No.3456; 06-28-19, City of Makati
MCLE Compliance No. 999888777, 03-03-98
MCLE No. VI-001268; June 28, 2019
[email protected]
0912 3456 789

Doc No. 20
Page No. 5
Book No. 2
Series of 2019

VERIFICATION AND CERTIFICATION AGAINST FORUM SHOPPING

I, Rogelio Dela Cruz, Filipino, of legal age, married and residing at 456 Malugay St., Brgy. San
Isidro, Makati City is authorized by the Defendant corporation in filling the Answer, attached is
the board resolution as “ANNEX B”, after having been sworn in accordance with law, depose
and state that:

1. I am the Defendant in the above-entitled case and have caused the preparation of the
foregoing Answer;

2. I have read and understood the allegations therein and the same are true and correct of
my own personal knowledge and/or based on authentic records;

3. I attest to the authenticity of the annexes hereof;

4. I have not commenced any action or filed any claim involving the same issues in any
court, tribunal or quasi-judicial agency, and to the best of my knowledge, no such
other action or claim is pending therein;

5. If there is such other pending action or claim, I will furnish this Honorable Court with
a complete statement of the present status thereof; and

6. If I should thereafter learn that the same or similar action or claim has been filed or is
pending, I shall report the fact within five (5) days therefrom to this Honorable Court
wherein my aforesaid complaint has been filed.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this 18 th day of June 2019, Makati City,
Philippines.

ROGELIO DELA CRUZ

Affiant

SUBSCRIBED and sworn to me before this 20th day of June 2019 in Makati City affiant after
exhibiting to me his Philippine passport, as competent evidence of his identity.

Atty. DELFIN DIMASALANG

123 Pio Del Pilar St., Brgy. San Isidro, Makati City
IBP No. 12345, Makati 1-98765
Attorney’s Roll No. 67890
PTR No.3456; 06-28-19, City of Makati
MCLE Compliance No. 999888777, 03-03-98
MCLE No. VI-001268; June 28, 2019
[email protected]
0912 3456 789

Doc No. 20
Page No. 5
Book No. 2
Series of 2019