Practice question
In a valid original RTC action, the defendant has a transaction-connected counterclaim cognizable by the regular courts. It requires no third party outside the court’s jurisdiction, and its nature is within the RTC’s competence, but its amount is below the RTC’s ordinary monetary threshold. Which is correct under Rule 6 section 7?
- The counterclaim can never be compulsory because of its amount alone
- Every counterclaim is compulsory regardless of all other criteria
- Only a cross-claim may be filed below that threshold
- The exception makes the amount alone no obstacle to compulsory treatment in an original RTC action, provided the other requirements are met
- The counterclaim automatically transfers the entire RTC action to a first-level court
Legal references
- https://lawphil.net/courts/rules/am_19-10-20-sc_2019.html — current Rule 6, sections 2–3, 5, 7–8 and 10–11, pleadings, defenses, counterclaims, replies and third-party claims.
- https://lawphil.net/courts/rules/rc_1-71_civil.html — Rule 6 unchanged sections 1, 4, 6 and 9, read with the 2019 amendments rather than superseded reply text.
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.