This case has been cited 3 times or more.
|
2016-01-20 |
BERSAMIN, J. |
||||
| The answer admits the material allegations of ultimate facts of the adverse party's pleadings not only when it expressly confesses the truth of such allegations but also when it omits to deal with them at all.[29] The controversion of the ultimate facts must only be by specific denial. Section 10, Rule 8 of the Rules of Court recognizes only three modes by which the denial in the answer raises an issue of fact. The first is by the defending party specifying each material allegation of fact the truth of which he does not admit and, whenever practicable, setting forth the substance of the matters upon which he relies to support his denial. The second applies to the defending party who desires to deny only a part of an averment, and the denial is done by the defending party specifying so much of the material allegation of ultimate facts as is true and material and denying only the remainder. The third is done by the defending party who is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of a material averment made in the complaint by stating so in the answer. Any material averment in the complaint not so specifically denied are deemed admitted except an averment of the amount of unliquidated damages.[30] | |||||
|
2013-11-20 |
PERLAS-BERNABE, J. |
||||
| In this relation, jurisprudence dictates that an answer fails to tender an issue if it does not comply with the requirements of a specific denial as set out in Sections 8[90] and 10,[91] Rule 8 of the Rules, resulting in the admission of the material allegations of the adverse party's pleadings.[92] As such, it is a form of judgment that is exclusively based on the submitted pleadings without the introduction of evidence as the factual issues remain uncontroverted.[93] | |||||