Ultimate facts are important, substantial facts

Ultimate facts are essential facts constituting the plaintiff’s cause of action. A fact is essential if it cannot be stricken out without leaving the statement of the cause of action insufficient. (G.R. No. L-19751, February 28, 1966)

The following are examples of allegations that are NOT ultimate facts:

1. Evidentiary or immaterial facts;
2. Legal conclusions, conclusions or inferences of facts from facts not stated, or incorrect inferences or conclusions from facts stated;
3. Conclusions of law alleged in the complaint are not binding on the court; and
4. The details of probative matter or particulars of evidence, statements of law, inferences and arguments.

General allegations that a contract is valid or legal, or is just, fair and reasonable, are mere conclusion of law. Likewise, allegations that a contract is void, voidable, invalid, illegal, ultra vires, or against public policy, without stating facts showing its invalidity, are mere conclusions of law; as are allegations that a contract is in conformity with, or in violation of a constitutional or statutory provision. (71 C.J.S. pp. 44-45)

The term "ultimate facts" as used in Sec. 3, Rule 3 of the Rules of Court, means the essential facts constituting the plaintiff's cause of action. A fact is essential if it cannot be stricken out without leaving the statement of the cause of action insufficient. (Moran, Rules of Court, Vol. I, 1963 ed., p. 213)

Ultimate facts are important and substantial facts which either directly form the basis of the primary right and duty, or which directly make up the wrongful acts or omissions of the defendant. The term does not refer to the details of probative matter or particulars of evidence by which these material elements are to be established. It refers to principal determinate, constitutive facts, upon the existence of which, the entire cause of action rests. (Montemayor vs. Raborar, et al., 53 O.G. No. 19, p. 6596, citing Pomeroy, Code Remedies, 5th Ed., sec. 420)