Declaratory Relief

What is the subject matter in a petition for declaratory relief?

The subject matter in a petition for declaratory relief is any of the following:

a) Deed;

b) Will;

c) Contract or other written instrument;

d) Statute;

e) Executive order or regulation;

f) Ordinance; or

g) Any other governmental regulation (Rule 63, Sec. 1).

What is the issue in the action?

The issue is the validity or construction of the above documents.

What is the relief sought?

The relief sought is the declaration of the petitioner’s rights and duties under the said documents.

● The purpose is to seek for a judicial interpretation of an instrument or for a judicial declaration of a person’s rights under a statute and not to ask for affirmative reliefs like injunction, execution, damages or any other relief beyond the purpose of the petition as declared under the Rules.

● The purpose is to ask the court to make a proper interpretation of a written instrument (deed, will, contract, or any other written instrument) or a statute, executive order, ordinance, or other governmental regulation.

● An action for declaratory relief is brought to secure an authoritative statement of the rights and obligations of the parties under a contract or a statute for their guidance in the enforcement or compliance with the same (Meralco vs. Philippine Consumers Foundation, 374 SCRA 262).

Who may file the action

1. Any person interested under a deed, will, contract or other written instrument

2. Any person whose rights are affected by a statute, executive order or regulation, ordinance or other governmental regulation (Rule 63, Sec. 1)

● Those who may sue under the contract should be those with interest under the contract like the parties, the assignees and the heirs as required by substantive law (Art. 1311, Civil Code).

● If it be a statute, executive order, regulation or ordinance, the petitioner is one whose rights are affected by the same (Rule 63, Sec. 1). The other parties are all persons who have or claim any interest which would be affected by the declaration. The rights of person not made parties to the action do not stand to be prejudiced by the declaration (Rule 63, Sec. 2).

Where to file the petition?

RTC. (Rule 63, Sec. 1)

When to file the petition?

Petition for declaratory relief is filed before there occurs any breach or violation of the deed, contract, statute, ordinance or executive order or regulation. (Rule 63, Sec. 1) It will not prosper when brought after a contract or a statute has already been breached or violated. If there has already been a breach, the appropriate ordinary civil action and not declaratory relief should be filed.

The concept of a cause of action as “an act or omission by which a person violates the right of another” under ordinary civil action does not apply. In declaratory relief, there must be NO breach or violation of the instrument or statute involved.

GR: Declaratory relief is available BEFORE there is actual breach or violation of an instrument or statute.

Exceptions:

Declaratory relief may still be availed even if there is breach or violation IF:

1. it concerns future application of the instrument or law (Gomez vs. Palomar, 25 SCRA 827) or

2. not objected to by the adverse party and the court has rendered judgment after full blown trial (Matalin Coconut Producers,143 SCRA 1)

Requisites of action for declaratory relief

1) The subject matter must be a deed, will, contract or other written instrument, statute, executive order or regulation or ordinance;

2) The terms of said document or the validity thereof are doubtful and require judicial construction;

3) There must have been no breach of the documents in question;

4) There must be actual justiciable controversy or the ripening seeds of one between persons whose interests are adverse ( there is threatened litigation the immediate future/there must be allegation of any threatened, imminent and inevitable violation of petitioner’s right sought to be prevented by the declaratory relief sought);

5) The issue must be ripe for judicial determination (as for example, where all administrative remedies have been exhausted);

6) adequate relief is not available through other means or other forms of action or proceeding. (Ferrer and Espera vs. Roco, Jr. G.R. No. 174129, July 5, 2010)

When court may refuse to make judicial declaration

The court, motu proprio or upon motion, may refuse to exercise the power to declare rights and to construe instruments in any case where:

a) A decision would not terminate the uncertainty or controversy which gave rise to the action; or

b) The declaration or construction is not necessary and proper under the circumstances (Rule 63, Sec. 5).

e.g. when the instrument or the statute has already been breached

In declaratory relief, the court is given the discretion to act or not to act on the petition. It may therefore choose not to construe the instrument sought to be construed or could refrain from declaring the rights of the petitioner under the deed or the law. A refusal of the court to declare rights or construe an instrument is actually the functional equivalent of the dismissal of the petition.

On the other hand, the court does not have the discretion to refuse to act with respect to actions described as similar remedies.

What are the actions described as similar remedies which the court may not refuse to render judgment?

a) Action for reformation of an instrument;

b) Action for quieting of title; and

c) Action to consolidate ownership

Conversion to ordinary action

If before the final termination of the case, a breach or violation should take place, the action may thereupon be converted into an ordinary action, and the parties shall be allowed to file such pleadings as may be necessary or proper. (Rule 63, Sec. 6) This is to avoid multiplicity of suits (Republic vs. Orbecido, G.R. No. 154380, Oct. 5, 2005).

Ordinary Action vs. Declaratory Relief

Ordinary Civil Action	Declaratory Relief
1. writ of execution is available	1. writ of execution is not available
2. there is a breach or violation of a right	2. there is no breach or violation of a right
3. grounds for dismissal – Rule 16	3. grounds for dismissal – a. Rule 16 b. Additional grounds - Where the decision would not terminate the uncertainty or controversy which gave rise to the action; or - Where the declaration or construction is not necessary and proper under the circumstances.

Declaratory Relief Improper in the Following Cases:

1) to obtain judicial declaration of citizenship;

2) to seek relief on moot questions or to resolve hypothetical, abstract or theoretical questions, or to decide claims which are uncertain;

3) to resolve political issues or questions;

4) to test the correctness or validity of a court decision;

5) to determine hereditary rights;

6) when the petition is based upon the happening of a contingent event;

7) when the petitioner is not the real party in interest; and

8) when administrative remedies have not yet been exhausted (enumerations from Feria, p. 437)

Procedural Peculiarities

1. The petition must be filed before there is a breach of contract or violation of the statute or ordinance.

2. Third-party complainant is not allowed

3. Except in actions for quieting of title, the court action on an action for declaratory relief is discretionary. Thus, the court motu proprio or upon motion may refuse to exercise the power to declare rights and to construe instruments in any case where a decision would not terminate the uncertainty or controversy which gave rise to the action or in any case where the declaration or construction is not necessary under the circumstances.

4. When a statute, executive order or any government regulation or ordinance is alleged to be unconstitutional, the Solicitor-General should be notified by the party assailing the same. If the validity of a local government ordinance is in question, the prosecutor or attorney of the local government should be notified.

Reformation of an instrument

1) It is not an action brought to reform a contract but to reform the instrument evidencing the contract. It presupposes that there is nothing wrong with the contract itself because there is a meeting of minds between the parties. The contract is to be reformed because despite the meeting of minds of the parties as to the object and cause of the contract, the instrument which is supposed to embody the agreement of the parties does not reflect their true agreement by reason of mistake, inequitable conduct or accident. The action is brought so the true intention of the parties may be expressed in the instrument (Art. 1359, CC).

2) The instrument may be reformed if it does not express the true intention of the parties because of lack of skill of the person drafting the instrument (Art. 1363, CC). If the parties agree upon the mortgage or pledge of property, but the instrument states that the property is sold absolutely or with a right of repurchase, reformation of the instrument is proper (Art. 1365, CC).

3) Where the consent of a party to a contract has been procured by fraud, inequitable conduct or accident, and an instrument was executed by the parties in accordance with the contract, what is defective is the contract itself because of vitiation of consent. The remedy is not to bring an action for reformation of the instrument but to file an action for annulment of the contract (Art. 1359, CC).

4) Reformation of the instrument cannot be brought to reform any of the following:

(a) Simple donation inter vivos wherein no condition is imposed;

(b) Wills; or

Consolidation of ownership

1) The concept of consolidation of ownership under Art. 1607, Civil Code, has its origin in the substantive provisions of the law on sales. Under the law, a contract of sale may be extinguished either by legal redemption (Art. 1619) or conventional redemption (Art. 1601).

Legal redemption (retracto legal) is a statutory mandated redemption of a property previously sold. For instance, a co-owner of a property may exercise the right of redemption in case the shares of all the other co-owners or any of them are sold to a third person (Art. 1620). The owners of adjoining lands shall have the right of redemption when a piece of rural land with a size of one hectare or less is alienated (Art. 1621).

Conventional redemption (pacto de retro) sale is one that is not mandated by the statute but one which takes place because of the stipulation of the parties to the sale. The period of redemption may be fixed by the parties in which case the period cannot exceed ten (10) years from the date of the contract. In the absence of any agreement, the redemption period shall be four (4) years from the date of the contract (Art. 1606).

When the redemption is not made within the period agreed upon, in case the subject matter of the sale is a real property, Art. 1607 provides that the consolidation of ownership in the vendee shall not be recorded in the Registry of Property without a judicial order, after the vendor has been duly heard.

2) The action brought to consolidate ownership is not for the purpose of consolidating the ownership of the property in the person of the vendee or buyer but for the registration of the property. The lapse of the redemption period without the seller a retro exercising his right of redemption, consolidates ownership or title upon the person of the vendee by operation of law. Art. 1607 requires the filing of the petition to consolidate ownership because the law precludes the registration of the consolidated title without judicial order (Cruz vs. Leis, 327 SCRA 570).

Quieting of title to real property

1) This action is brought to remove a cloud on title to real property or any interest therein. The action contemplates a situation where the instrument or a record is apparently valid or effective but is in truth and in fact invalid, ineffective, voidable or unenforceable, and may be prejudicial to said title to real property. This action is then brought to remove a cloud on title to real property or any interest therein. It may also be brought as a preventive remedy to prevent a cloud from being cast upon title to real property or any interest therein (Art. 476).

2) The plaintiff need not be in possession of the real property before he may bring the action as long as he can show that he has a legal or an equitable title to the property which is the subject matter of the action (Art. 477).