ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION
Atty. Analyn Avila
Basic Principles of ADR
RA 9285 – Alternative Dispute Resolution Law
Note: There are other modes not provided for by law that is valid as an alternative
route to resolve cases. As long as it is not contrary to law, public order, and public
policy.
Basic Principles of ADR
1. Conflict is a fact of life.
2. Conflicts affect harmoniou33333s human relationships
3. Conflicts happen because parties have unmet substantive, procedural, and
psychological needs, which are often “obscured” by data problems, relationship
issues, and values differences.
4. We have various options available in dealing with conflicts.
Modes of Resolving Disputes
1. Unilateral Mode
Action taken by one party without regard to the wishes of the other party
Fight, flight or surrender, forgiveness
2. Bilateral Mode
Direct negotiations between the parties to arrive at a settlement that could be
mutually beneficial
3. Third Party Intervention Mode
Facilitative (conciliation, mediation)
Evaluative or decisional (arbitration, adjudication)
Alternative Dispute Resolution, defined
Any process or procedure used to resolve a dispute or controversy other than by
adjudication of a presiding judge of a court or an officer of a government agency in
which a neutral third party participates to assist in the resolution of the issues
includes mediation, conciliation, early neutral evaluation, mini trial, or any
combination thereof (RA 9285)
Advantages of ADR
1. It is less expensive compared to the costs of litigation and other forms of conflict
resolution.
2. It enables parties to reach settlements speedily.
3. It enables the parties to know and understand the parties’ interests and concerns.
4. Parties are generally more satisfied with the agreements that they themselves
crafted.
5. Parties are able to address more concerns.
6. Parties are able to directly participate in the process, with minimum assistance of
legal counsel.
7. Relationships of the parties are often preserved.
Introduction and History
1. Pertinent Special Laws
a. Civil Code of the Philippines, Chapter 1&2, Book IV (Arts. 2021 – 2046 NCC)
i. Republic Act No. 876
b. International Conventions (Resolution NO. 71 – Adhering to the United
nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral
Awards)
c. Other Laws
i. Labor Code
ii. Local Government Code
iii. Rules on Construction dispute arbitration
iv. Rules on ADR among government agencies
2. Conflict Resolution in the Philippines
3. Katarungang Pambarangay (PD 1508, as repealed by Local Government Code)
The Katarungang Pambarangay is a community-based mechanism for dispute
resolution. It covers disputes between members of the community and involves the
Punong Barangay and other members of the community (The Lupon members) as
intermediaries (mediators, conciliators, and arbitrators)
Revised Katarungang Pambarangay Law
June 1, 1992 – The DOJ promulgated the IRR for the KP Law, otherwise known
as the KP rules. These rules govern the establishment, administration, and operation
of the Lupong Tagapamayapa, as well as the procedures in settling disputes among
barangay members through mediation, conciliation, and arbitration.
Objective of the KP Law
To reduce the number of court litigations and prevent the deterioration of the
quality of justice, which has been brought about by the indiscriminate filing of cases
in the courts.
Cases Covered
1. All disputes are subject to Barangay conciliation pursuant to the RKP Law and
prior recourse thereto is a precondition before filing a complaint in court or any
government office. (See Alogoc, p. 463, for number of cases)
Exceptions
Section 408. Subject Matter for Amicable Settlement Exception Thereto. – The
lupon of each barangay shall have authority to bring together the parties actually
residing in the same city or municipality for amicable settlement of all dispute except:
1. Where one party is the government, or any subdivision or instrumentality
thereof
2. Where one party is a public officer or employee, and the dispute relates to the
performance of his official functions
3. Offenses punishable by imprisonment exceeding one (1) year or a fine exceeding
Php 5,000.00
4. Offenses where there is no private offended party
5. Where the dispute involves real properties located in different cities or
municipalities unless the parties thereto agree to submit their differences to
amicable settlement by an appropriate lupon
6. Disputes involving parties who actually reside in barangays of different cities or
municipalities, except where such barangay units adjoin each other, and the
parties thereto agree to submit their differences to amicable settlement by an
appropriate lupon
7. Such other classes of disputes which the President may determine in the
interest of justice or upon the recommendation of the Secretary of Justice
The court tin which non-criminal cases not failing within the authority of the lupon
under this Code are filed may, at nay time before trial, motu proprio refer the case
to the lupon concerned for amicable settlement.
Section 412. Conciliation
(b) Where Parties May Go Directly to Court. – The parties may go directly to
court on following instances:
1. Where the accused is under detention
2. Where a person has otherwise been deprived of personal liberty calling for
habeas corpus proceedings
3. Where actions are coupled with provisional remedies such as preliminary
injunction, attachment, delivery of personal property and support pendente lite;
and
4. Where the action may otherwise be barred by the statute of limitations
(c) Conciliation Among Members of Indigenous Cultural Communities. –
The customs and traditions of indigenous cultural communities shall be applied
in settling disputes between members of the cultural communities.
Other Exceptions
Supreme Court Administrative Circular No. 14-93 dated July
15, 1993
1. Any complaint by or against corporations, partnership, or juridical entities, since
only individuals shall be partis to Barangay Conciliation either as complainants or
respondents (Section 1, Rule VI)
2. Disputes where urgent legal action is necessary to prevent injustice from being
committed or further continued specifically the following
a. Criminal cases where accused is under police custody or detention
b. Petitions for habeas corpus by a person illegally deprived of his rightful
custody over another or a person illeglaly deprived or on acting in his behalf
c. Actions coupled with provisional remedies such as preliminary injunction,
attachment, delivery of personal property and support during the pendency
of the action; and
d. Actions which may be barred by the Statue of limitations
e. Where the dispute arises from the Comprehensive Agrarian reform Law
(CARL)
f. Labor Disputes or controversies arising from employer employee-relations
(Montoya vs. Escayo)
g. Actions to annul judgment upon a compromise which may be filed directly
in court (Sanchez vs. Tupaz)
Mandatory Nature and applicability
No complaint, petition, or proceeding involving any matter within the authority of the
lupon shall be filed or instituted directly in court or any other government office for
adjudication unless there has been a confrontation of the parties before the Lupon
Chairman or the Pangkat and conciliation or settlement has been reached as certified
by the Lupon Secretary or the Pangkat Secretary, attested by the Lupon or Pangkat
Chairman, or unless the settlement has been repudiated.
A case filed in court without compliance with prior Barangay conciliation which is a
pre-condition for formal adjudication (section 412 (a) of the Revised Katarungang
Pambarangay Law may be dismissed upon motion of defendant/s, not for lack of
jurisdiction of the court but for failure to state a cause of action or prematurity
(Royales vs. IAC, 127 SCRA 470; Gonzales vs. CA, 151 SCRA 289),
or the court may suspend proceedings upon petition of any party under Section 1,
Rule 21 of the Rules; and refer the case motu proprio to the appropriate Barangay
authority, applying by analogy Section 408 (g), 2 nd par., of the Revised Katarungang
Pambarangay Law which reads as follows:
Note: Failure to Raise the issue created due to the failure to comply with RKP in the
earliest possible opportunity may cause inadmissibility of said defense
Suspension of Prescriptive Period of Offenses for Complaints Filed
under KPL
Section 410. Procedure for Amicable Settlement
- Suspension of prescriptive period of offenses – While the dispute is under
mediation, conciliation, or arbitration, the prescriptive periods for offense and
cause of action under existing laws shall be interrupted upon filing of the
complaint with the punong barangay
- The prescriptive periods shall resume upon receipt by the complainant of the
complaint or the certificate of repudiation or the certification to file action
issued by the lupon or pangkat secretary; Provided, however, that such
interruption shall not exceed sixty (60) days from the filing of the complaint
with the punong barangay.
See: Alogoc, Page 473 onwards for prescriptive periods
Sample Computation
Slight physical injuries – prescriptive period is 2 months from its commission; crime
committed on April 5, 2021, the crime will prescribe on June 5, 2021; if complaint
filed with punong barangay on May 18, 2021, there is a balance of 18 days.
If a certificate to file action (CFA) was issued by the barangay on the 50 th day,
or July 8, 2021, the complainant has until July 26, 2021 (18 days from the
issuance of CFA) to file the complaint
If the barangay fails to issue a CFA after the lapse of 60 days, the complaint
may be immediately filed directly with the Office of the Prosecutor even
without the CFA on the ground that it will already be barred by the Statute of
Limitations.
Parties and venue
Section 410. Procedure for Amicable Settlement. – (a) Who may initiate proceeding –
Upon payment of the appropriate filing fee, any individual who has a cause of action
against another individual involving any matter within the authority of the lupon may
complain, orally or in writing, to the lupon chairman of the barangay.
Only individual shall be parties
Rules on venue
a. For disputes between person actually residing in the same barangay, it
shall be brought for amicable settlement before the Lupon of the
barangay
b. Those involving actual residents of different barangays within same city
or municipality, it shall be brought in the barangay where the
respondent or any of the respondents, at the election of the complainant
c. All disputes involving real property, or any interest therein shall be
brought in the barangay where the real property or the larger portion
thereof is situated
d. Those arising at the workplace where the contending parties are
employed or at the institution where such parties are enrolled for study,
shall be brought in the barangay where such work place or institution is
located
Summary
Cases should be filed in the place where the respondent actually resides
(Respondent’s actually residence rule); the place where the respondent’s real property
is located (real Property Location Rule); Common workplace of the parties (Common
Workplace Rule); and Common Place of Study (Common Place of Study Rule).
Objections to venue shall be raised in the mediation proceedings before the
punong barangay; otherwise, the same shall be deemed waived. Any legal questions
which may confront the punong barangay in resolving objections to venue herein
referred to may be submitted to the Secretary of Justice or his duly designated
representative, hereon shall be binding.
Personal appearance is mandatory before the KPL
Punong Barangay and the Lupon
Punong Barangay heads the Lupon – See p. 489, Algoco, for specific powers
