Practice question
In a case governed by the current Rules, a defendant files a motion to dismiss combining alleged lack of personal jurisdiction with prescription. Counsel quotes the old rule that adding another ground 'shall not' be voluntary appearance. The court must also examine current restrictions on motions to dismiss. Which statement is correct about §23?
- The old quotation is incorrect: current §23 deems the combination voluntary appearance, and this consequence does not itself authorize an otherwise prohibited motion.
- The old quotation remains the current text.
- Every ground for dismissal is now permissible by motion because §23 mentions a motion.
- The combination automatically creates subject-matter jurisdiction.
- The court must treat prescription as proved merely because it is listed.
Legal references
- https://lawphil.net/courts/rules/am_19-10-20-sc_2019.html — AM19-10-20-SC, current 2019 amendments, Rules8§12,14§§20–23 and15.
Answer this question in flashcards to review your response and continue practicing.