Introduction

In the Philippine judicial system, governed primarily by the 1987 Rules of Court (as amended by A.M. No. 19-10-20-SC, the 2019 Revised Rules of Civil Procedure, and related circulars), attendance at court hearings is not merely a procedural formality but a constitutional and statutory imperative. The right to due process under Article III, Section 1 of the 1987 Constitution demands that parties be given notice and opportunity to be heard. Failure to attend—whether by plaintiff, defendant, accused, witness, or even counsel—triggers a cascade of adverse consequences designed to ensure orderly administration of justice, prevent delay, and uphold the integrity of proceedings. These repercussions vary by case type (civil, criminal, special proceedings, or administrative), stage of litigation, and presence of a valid excuse. Courts, guided by jurisprudence from the Supreme Court (e.g., Republic v. Sandiganbayan, G.R. No. 152154, 2005; People v. Lumahan, G.R. No. 122980, 1999), exercise discretion but prioritize expeditious resolution under the Speedy Trial Act of 1998 (R.A. No. 8493) and the Judiciary's Action Plan for the 2020s.

This article comprehensively examines the legal framework, specific sanctions, procedural nuances, defenses, and remedial measures for non-attendance, drawing from the Rules of Court, Revised Rules on Evidence, and key Supreme Court rulings.

General Principles Applicable to All Cases

Before delving into specifics, note these overarching rules:

Notice Requirement: Hearings must be properly scheduled and served via summons, subpoena, or court order (Rule 14, Rules of Court). Constructive notice via publication applies in certain in rem cases.
Just Excuse Standard: Absence due to force majeure, serious illness, or other valid causes (supported by affidavits/medical certificates) may mitigate or excuse sanctions (Rule 30, Sec. 4; Heirs of Reyes v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 119717, 2000).
Contempt Power: Under Rule 71, willful disobedience of a court order or subpoena constitutes indirect contempt, punishable by fine (up to P30,000 for individuals, P100,000 for juridical persons as of 2023 amendments) or imprisonment (up to 6 months), or both. Direct contempt applies for acts in the court's presence.
Costs and Damages: Courts may impose attorney's fees, litigation expenses, and treble costs for unjustified absence causing delay (Rule 142; Sec. 8, Rule 18).

Consequences in Civil Cases

Civil proceedings (ordinary actions, special civil actions) emphasize party initiative. Non-attendance often leads to procedural default, shifting the burden to the absent party.

1. Pre-Trial and Preliminary Conference (Rule 18)

Plaintiff's Absence: Mandatory dismissal without prejudice (unless refiled within the prescriptive period). No motion to lift is allowed; refiling is the remedy, but with possible res judicata risks if refiled negligently (Tung v. San Jose, G.R. No. 176068, 2008).
Defendant's Absence: Plaintiff proceeds ex parte. Defendant forfeits the right to present evidence or cross-examine, though they retain rights to object to plaintiff's evidence and appeal. A motion to set aside must show "meritorious defense" and "excusable neglect" within 15 days (Rule 18, Sec. 5).
Both Parties Absent: Case archived or dismissed motu proprio.

2. Trial Proper (Rule 30)

Failure to Appear at Scheduled Hearing: The court may adjourn and impose costs, or allow the present party to present evidence ex parte. Repeated absences can lead to dismissal for failure to prosecute (Rule 17, Sec. 3) or default judgment (Rule 9, Sec. 3).
Default Order: If defendant was properly summoned but fails to answer or appear, judgment by default may be rendered based solely on plaintiff's evidence. This is appealable but not via certiorari unless grave abuse of discretion (Gomez v. Alampay, G.R. No. L-39792, 1975).
Post-Judgment: Absence during promulgation or motions for reconsideration may bar subsequent challenges, leading to finality and execution (Rule 39).

3. Other Stages

Mediation/Judicial Dispute Resolution (JDR): Non-appearance results in termination of ADR, with adverse inference in main case (A.M. No. 11-1-6-SC).
Appeals: Failure to appear at oral arguments (rarely mandatory) may weaken positions but rarely causes outright dismissal.

Consequences in Criminal Cases

Criminal due process is stricter, balancing the accused's rights under Rule 113-119 with public interest in swift prosecution.

1. For the Accused

Arraignment (Rule 116): Non-appearance after notice leads to issuance of a bench warrant (Alias Warrant of Arrest). Bail, if posted, is forfeited (Rule 114, Sec. 21). Rearrest follows.
Pre-Trial (Rule 118): Similar to civil—ex parte proceedings for prosecution; accused loses chance to stipulate facts or mark evidence.
Trial in Absentia (Rule 119, Sec. 14; Const., Art. III, Sec. 14(2)): After arraignment, trial proceeds without the accused if they unjustifiably absents themselves. Judgment is valid and appealable only if they surrender or are rearrested. This applies post-1998 amendments to curb dilatory tactics (People v. Agbayani, G.R. No. 113725, 1999).
Bail Forfeiture and Cancellation: Non-appearance at any hearing causes immediate forfeiture. After 30 days without explanation, bail is cancelled, and the accused is declared in default (Rule 114, Sec. 21; Almeda v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 126668, 1998).
Promulgation of Judgment (Rule 120): Absence leads to promulgation in absentia; the period to appeal runs from notice to counsel or last known address.

2. For Witnesses

Subpoenaed Witnesses: Non-appearance without just cause = indirect contempt (Rule 21, Sec. 8; Rule 71). Bench warrant may issue for apprehension.
Unsubpoenaed but Notified: Adverse inference; prosecution/defense may move to strike testimony or proceed without.

3. Special Criminal Cases

Drug Cases (R.A. 9165, as amended): Mandatory warrants and contempt.
Domestic Violence (R.A. 9262): Protective orders violated by non-appearance may lead to arrest.
Fiscal's Absence: Rare, but may cause postponement with sanctions on the government.

Administrative and Quasi-Judicial Contexts

Labor Cases (NLRC): Non-appearance at mandatory conferences leads to ex parte submission and possible dismissal of complaint (Labor Code, Art. 230; DOLE rules).
Ombudsman/Sandiganbayan: Similar default rules; public officers risk administrative suspension.
Quasi-Judicial Bodies (e.g., SEC, HLURB, now DHSUD): Rules mirror Rules of Court; contempt powers apply.

Defenses and Excusable Neglect

Valid Grounds: Force majeure (typhoons, pandemics—see A.M. No. 20-4-16-SC on e-filing), serious illness (with certificate), death in family, or court-induced errors (e.g., wrong notice).
Motion to Lift/Set Aside: Filed within 15 days (civil) or reasonable time (criminal), with affidavit of merit. Granted if no prejudice to opposing party (Philippine National Bank v. Court of Appeals, G.R. No. 108630, 1995).
Reconsideration/Appeal: Absence alone is not jurisdictional error unless it violates due process.

Jurisprudential Trends and Recent Developments

The Supreme Court, in Heirs of M. San Juan v. CA (2021) and circulars on e-courts, emphasizes that virtual hearings (post-COVID) do not excuse non-participation without technical justification. Fines for contempt increased via R.A. No. 11576 (2021 Judicial Efficiency Act). In family courts, child-related absences may trigger protective measures under A.M. No. 03-04-04-SC.

Conclusion

Failing to attend a court hearing in the Philippines carries severe, often irreversible consequences, from case dismissal and default judgments to warrants, contempt, and forfeiture of rights. Parties must treat court orders with utmost seriousness, documenting excuses meticulously. The system prioritizes diligence to prevent abuse, ensuring justice is neither delayed nor denied.