How to File a Demand Letter for Payment and a Cyberlibel Case in the Philippines Comprehensive Philippine Legal Guide (2025)

Foreword / Disclaimer

This article is for educational purposes only and is not a substitute for individualized legal advice. Laws and procedural rules evolve; always check the latest issuances of Congress, the Supreme Court, and the Department of Justice (DOJ), or consult a Philippine lawyer before acting.

1. Demand Letter for Payment

1.1 Why Send a Demand Letter?

Reason	Effect
Put debtor in default	Under Art. 1169 & 1170, Civil Code, delay (mora) arises only after a demand, making the debtor liable for interest & damages.
Interrupt prescription	Art. 1155: A written extrajudicial demand stops the running of the prescriptive period.
Proof of good faith & costs	Courts often require proof that you tried amicable settlement before litigation; failure can affect recoverable costs.
Satisfy pre‑suit requirements	Small Claims (≤ ₱1 million) & ordinary collection suits usually require prior demand.

1.2 Legal Foundations

Civil Code – Arts. 1155, 1169, 1170, 1305 et seq.
Rules of Court – Rule 6 (pleadings), Rule 16 (dismissals) on conditions precedent.
A.M. No. 08‑8‑7‑SC as amended – Small Claims requires “Certification of Non‑Forum Shopping” plus a copy of the demand letter.
Barangay Justice System (BJS) – R.A. 7160, ch. VII; most money claims ≤ ₱400 k between residents of the same city/municipality need barangay conciliation after demand but before court filing (exceptions: corporations, government, etc.).

1.3 Core Contents of a Demand Letter

Heading & Contact Details (sender & debtor).
Statement of Facts – transaction, due date, amount owed.
Demand Proper – clear phrase such as “You are hereby demanded to pay…”.
Deadline – give a reasonable period (customarily 5‑15 calendar days).
Consequences of Ignoring – interest, damages, suit, costs.
Mode of Payment & Where – bank, address, GCash, etc.
Reference to Evidence – contract no., invoices, promissory note.
Good‑faith Offer – optional; e.g., installment plan.
Signature & Capacity – lawyer or creditor; include PRC ID & MCLE for lawyers.

1.4 Execution and Delivery

Mode	Proof
Personal service	Signed acknowledgment or affidavit of server.
Registered mail	Registry receipt + “Return Card” (green card).
Courier / Email	Keep waybill / email headers; may need authenticated printout.
Notarization	Not required but adds authenticity; useful if debtor disputes receipt.

1.5 Timelines & Prescription

Simple written contracts – 10 years (Art. 1144) from breach; demand interrupts.
Oral contracts – 6 years.
Quasi‑contract/unjust enrichment – 6 years.
Barangay conciliation must commence within 60 days of demand if required; otherwise, the action may be dismissed for failure to comply with a condition precedent (Rule 16, Sec. 1[j]).

1.6 After the Deadline Expires

BJS Mediation/Arbitration (if applicable).
Small Claims Case – Verified Statement of Claim + attachments filed with MTC/MeTC (no lawyer needed).
Regular Civil Action for Sum of Money – Complaint under Rule 2; attach demand letter & proof of delivery as Annex A.
Provisional Remedies – attachment (Rule 57) if debtor is absconding; restraining orders, etc.

1.7 Common Pitfalls

Vague dates (“ASAP”) – courts may find demand unclear.
Demand sent after prescription lapsed – interruption no longer works.
Skipping barangay conciliation despite parties living in same city – case will be dismissed.
Using threatening or abusive language – may expose sender to counterclaims under Art. 19 & 21 Civil Code.

1.8 Sample Basic Demand Letter (Skeleton)

[Date]

[Debtor’s Name & Address]

RE: DEMAND FOR PAYMENT – ₱______

Sir/Madam:

We refer to [contract/invoice no. ___ dated ___] where you undertook to pay ₱______ on or before ______. Despite repeated verbal reminders, the obligation remains unpaid.

You are hereby DEMANDED to pay the full amount of ₱______ within **seven (7) calendar days** from receipt of this letter, plus accrued interest of ₱______ (2% per month from ______), totaling ₱______.

Failure to comply will leave us no alternative but to file the appropriate action to protect our interests, including, but not limited to, civil and criminal remedies, with the corresponding costs and damages for your account.

Payment may be deposited to [bank details] or delivered to [address] during business hours.

Very truly yours,

[Signature]
[Name & Title / IBP No.]

## 2. Cyberlibel Case

2.1 Statutory Framework

Revised Penal Code (RPC) – Arts. 353‑357 (libel; prescriptive period: 1 year).
R.A. 10175 (Cybercrime Prevention Act of 2012) – Sec. 4(c)(4): libel “committed through a computer system”.
R.A. 3326 – Offenses under special laws: prescriptive period 12 years if penalty ≤ 6 years and > 1 year; Supreme Court in Disini v. Sec. of Justice (G.R. 203335, 24 Feb 2014) applied this to cyberlibel.
DOJ Department Circular No. 013‑22 – Cybercrime investigation & prosecution manual.
Rules on Electronic Evidence (A.M. No. 01‑7‑01‑SC) – governs admissibility of digital evidence.

2.2 Elements of Cyberlibel

Defamatory imputation of a crime, vice, defect or act;
Publication via a computer device reachable to a third person;
Identifiable victim;
Malice, presumed for defamatory statements unless privileged;
Computer‑related means (website, social media, email, etc.). Punishment: prisión correccional in its maximum period to prisión mayor minimum (4 years 2 months – 8 years 8 months) + fine up to ₱1 million; civil damages separate.

2.3 Jurisdiction & Venue

Regional Trial Court (RTC) – Cybercrime Court in province/city where (a) the complainant resides, or (b) any computer accessed/uploaded the defamatory content.
DOJ Office of Cybercrime designates special prosecutors; NBI Cybercrime Division & PNP Anti‑Cybercrime Group conduct investigations.

2.4 Prescriptive Period

12 years from date of first publication or “discovery rule” (when complainant learned with reasonable diligence). Each republication (share/retweet) may give rise to a new offense within one year if offline, though jurisprudence remains fluid.

2.5 Step‑by‑Step Filing Guide

Stage	Action	Practical Tips
1. Evidence Preservation	Take full‑screen screenshots including URL, date/time; download webpage via Webrecorder or .WARC format; record live links in Chain‑of‑Custody Form.	Use hash (SHA‑256) to show integrity; notarize a printout w/ affidavit of authenticity (Rule 5, E‑Evidence Rules).
2. Preliminary Assessment	Verify if statement is defamatory per se or has qualified privilege (fair comment, reportorial).	Consult counsel; weigh possibility of Anti‑SLAPP critique.
3. Affidavit‑Complaint	Draft narrative stating facts, attach evidence, ID details of respondent(s); swear before prosecutor or notary.	For corporate complainant, attach Secretary’s Certificate & board resolution.
4. Filing with NBI/PNP	Submit complaint; request Subpoena Duces Tecum to platforms (Meta, X, Google) for IP logs.	Provide email headers if defamatory content was emailed.
5. Prosecutor’s Subpoena / Counter‑Affidavit**	Respondents get 10 days to file.	“Reply‑Affidavit” optional but advisable; attach technical rebuttals.
6. Resolution & Information	Prosecutor issues Resolution (Probable Cause) & drafts an Information for court.	You may move for reconsideration within 15 days if dismissed.
7. Court Proceedings	RTC raffles case; issues warrant unless respondent posts waiver of reading.	Bail usually ₱10‑20 k; arraignment within 30 days.
8. Trial & Judgment	Prosecution must prove elements + identity of author.	Digital forensics expert often required; E‑Evidence authenticity crucial.
9. Civil Damages	May be included ex delicto (RPC Art. 33) or via separate civil action.	File within same trial to save fees.

2.6 Defenses & Mitigating Circumstances

Truth + Good Motives + Justifiable Ends (qualifiedly privileged).
Fair Comment on public figures.
Unidentifiable victim (“generalized rant”).
Prescription (publication > 12 years ago).
Lack of malice (private communication to authority).
Successful plea to lesser penalty – Art. 360(3) for spontaneous retraction.

2.7 Recent Jurisprudence Highlights

Ressa v. People (G.R. 257245, Oct 10 2022) – upheld conviction; clarified republication doctrine applies when substantial modification occurs.
Belo‑KHO v. Tulfo (G.R. 227382, Mar 29 2022) – Facebook posts admissible if provenance authenticated; hash values preferred but not indispensable.
People v. Bayoy (CA‑G.R. CR‑HC 10217, Aug 12 2023) – “share” button alone insufficient to presume malice; prosecution must prove intent.

2.8 Tips for Complainants

Act quickly – preserve logs; some platforms delete data in 90 days.
Maintain confidentiality – leaking draft complaints online can expose you to counter‑suits.
Consider mediation – DOJ Cybercrime offers settlement; apology & retraction may suffice.
Budget realistically – forensic fees ₱15‑40 k; filing fees based on damages.
Prepare for backlash – online libel cases often publicized; reputation management advisable.

2.9 Tips for Respondents

Gather exculpatory evidence early (context, truth).
Avoid further posts—each new post may be new libel.
Consider filing a Motion to Dismiss (Rule 117) for defective Information.

## 3. Comparative Quick‑Reference

Aspect	Demand Letter	Cyberlibel
Nature	Civil, extrajudicial prerequisite	Criminal (special law) + civil damages
Purpose	Collection / put in default	Protect reputation / penalize online defamation
Time‑bar	6 or 10 yrs; interrupted by demand	12 yrs (RA 3326)
Mandatory pre‑filing	Often yes (demand, barangay)	None, but evidence preservation essential
Venue	Debtor’s address or where cause arose	RTC Cybercrime court where complainant resides or post accessed
Penalty	Monetary judgment + interest	Imprisonment + fine + damages
Typical cost	₱1−5 k drafting; filing fee small claims ₱2 k+	Forensic + filing ₱20 k+; lawyer fees vary

## 4. Frequently Asked Questions

Is notarization of a demand letter mandatory? No, but it strengthens authenticity. Courts accept unnotarized letters if delivery is proved.
Can I email a demand letter? Yes; print the “full header” to show routing details. Some courts require proof the debtor customarily corresponds by email.
What if the libelous post was already deleted? File with NBI quickly; they can request server‑side logs under the Cybercrime law’s preservation order (Sec. 13, RA 10175).
Can corporations sue for cyberlibel? Yes. The corporation is treated as a “juridical person” capable of reputation per Filipinas Broadcasting v. Ago Medical (G.R. 170511, Jan 17 2011). A board resolution must authorize the complaint.
Is truth an absolute defense? Only if the defamatory statements were published with good motives and for justifiable ends (Art. 361 RPC). Exposing wrongdoing publicly often qualifies; pure malice does not.

## 5. Conclusion Filing a demand letter is a low‑cost, high‑leverage step that can interrupt prescription, satisfy pre‑suit requirements, and often prompts voluntary payment. If amicable settlement fails, Philippine procedural rules funnel the dispute into Small Claims, barangay conciliation, or regular civil actions.

A cyberlibel complaint, by contrast, is a specialized criminal proceeding governed by RA 10175 and the RPC. It demands rigorous evidence preservation, technical know‑how, and careful navigation of jurisdiction and constitutional free‑speech issues. Successful prosecution may vindicate one’s reputation but comes with higher financial, emotional, and reputational costs.

Understanding the distinct legal bases, timelines, and procedural checkpoints for each remedy equips parties to choose the most strategic—and compliant—path forward. When in doubt, consult counsel; a short meeting can prevent years of costly litigation.

Prepared: 18 July 2025 – Manila, Philippines

Foreword / Disclaimer

1. Demand Letter for Payment