Practice question
Distinguish consolidation for trial that preserves separate actions from actual consolidation that merges them. Why should the word consolidated alone not be treated as proof of one universal effect?
Legal references
- https://lawphil.net/courts/rules/rc_1-71_civil.html — Rule 31 sections 1–2, consolidation, joint hearing and separate trials.
- https://lawphil.net/courts/rules/am_19-10-20-sc_2019.html — 2019 amendments retaining Rule 31 without amendment.
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2012/apr2012/gr_173820_2012.html — Producers Bank v. Excelsa Industries, G.R. No. 173820, April 16, 2012, main decision distinguishing forms and effects of consolidation.
- https://lawphil.net/judjuris/juri2009/jun2009/gr_183211_2009.html — PNB v. Gotesco Tyan Ming Development, G.R. No. 183211, June 5, 2009, jurisdiction and protection against prejudice in consolidation.
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.