Scribd
Upload
34 views1 page

Understanding Interpleader Rules in Law

1) An interpleader action allows a party holding property or with an obligation to multiple claimants to ask the court for those claimants to litigate among themselves who is entitled to the property or payment. It protects against double vexation of a single liability. 2) Where there are conflicting claims to a particular sum, the amount claimed determines jurisdiction. The issue is which claimant is entitled to collect the sum. 3) In an interpleader case, an adverse claimant can be declared in default for failing to answer within the required period, barring them from any claim to the subject matter. This allows for default is consistent with the purpose of resolving all claims in one suit.

Uploaded by

Consuelo Narag Galagala
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
34 views1 page

Understanding Interpleader Rules in Law

1) An interpleader action allows a party holding property or with an obligation to multiple claimants to ask the court for those claimants to litigate among themselves who is entitled to the property or payment. It protects against double vexation of a single liability. 2) Where there are conflicting claims to a particular sum, the amount claimed determines jurisdiction. The issue is which claimant is entitled to collect the sum. 3) In an interpleader case, an adverse claimant can be declared in default for failing to answer within the required period, barring them from any claim to the subject matter. This allows for default is consistent with the purpose of resolving all claims in one suit.

Uploaded by

Consuelo Narag Galagala
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd

G.R. No.

L-25138 As held by this Court in an early case, the action of interpleader is a remedy whereby a person who has property in his possession or has an obligation to render wholly
August 28, 1969 or partially, without claiming any right in both, comes to court and asks that the defendants who have made upon him conflicting claims upon the same property or who
JOSE A. BELTRAN, ET consider themselves entitled to demand compliance with the obligation be required to litigate among themselves in order to determine who is entitled to the property or
AL., plaintiffs-appellants,  payment of the obligation. "The remedy is afforded not to protect a person against a double liability but to protect him against a double vexation in respect of one
vs. PEOPLE'S HOMESITE & liability."
HOUSING
CORPORATION, defendants-
appellees.

G.R. No. L-26443               It was held that where the conflicting claims involve the right to receive a particular sum, the amount of the sum claimed determines the jurisdiction. The issue is who
March 25, 1969 between or among the defendants is entitled to collect the same and the amount is the object of the action. There is no merit in the contention that the subject matter of
MAKATI DEVELOPMENT the litigation is not the sum, but the right “to compel the defendants to litigate among themselves.”
CORPORATION, plaintiff-
appellant, 
vs. PEDRO C. TANJUATCO
and CONCRETE
AGGREGATES,
INC., defendants-appellees.

G.R. NO. 193494 MARCH 7,


2014 “At any rate, an adverse claimant in an interpleader case may be declared in default. Under Rule 62, Section 5 of the 1997 Rules of Civil Procedure, a claimant who
fails to answer within the required period may, on motion, be declared in default.
LUI ENTERPRISES INC., The consequence of the default is that the court may "render judgment barring [the defaulted claimant] from any claim in respect to the subject matter." The Rules
Petitioner. vs. ZUELLIG would not have allowed claimants in interpleader cases to be declared in default if it would "ironically defeat the very purpose of the suit."”
PHARMA CORP. AND THE
PHILIPPINE BANK
1 RULECOMMUNICATIONS,
62-INTERPLEADER MERAKI LEX
Respondents.

G.R. No. L-23851 March 26,


1976 Besides, a successful litigant cannot later be impleaded by his defeated adversary in an interpleader suit and compelled to prove his claim anew against other adverse
WACK WACK GOLF & claimants, as that would in effect be a collateral attack upon the judgment.
COUNTRY CLUB,
INC., plaintiff-appellant,  In fine, the instant interpleader suit cannot prosper because the Corporation had already been made independently liable in civil case 26044 and, therefore, its present
vs. application for interpleader would in effect be a collateral attack upon the final judgment in the said civil case; the appellee Lee had already established his rights to
LEE E. WON alias RAMON membership fee certificate 201 in the aforesaid civil case and, therefore, this interpleader suit would compel him to establish his rights anew, and thereby increase
LEE and BIENVENIDO A. instead of diminish litigations, which is one of the purposes of an interpleader suit, with the possibility that the benefits of the final judgment in the said civil case might
TAN, defendants-appellees. eventually be taken away from him; and because the Corporation allowed itself to be sued to final judgment in the said case, its action of interpleader was filed
inexcusably late, for which reason it is barred by laches or unreasonable delay. 

CASTRO, C.J.:

You might also like